LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



Chap. Copyright Xo. 

ShelL___d-KJl' 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



' v , 



&&rt 



REVOLUTION? 




JOHN S/ HITTELL 



Only one hundred copies of this edition are printed, 
all for gratuitous distribution. 



SAN FRANCISCO; 



1900. 



73392 

* t-S *_J r^e r-w 



/ 9 1900 

Cc?vr!f?ht entry 

] SECOND COPY. 

I gbiivec^d ta 

1 GwiiW DIVISION, 

UfflLiiuafitt- 



*< 



.^ 



Copyright, 1900, 

by 

JOHN S. HITTELL. 



PREFACE. 

To explain the chief defects of the government 
of the United States and to propose the best rem- 
edy for them, — these are the two main purposes 
of this book. 

Our political evils have long been known to pub- 
lic opinion at home and abroad and most of them 
have often been mentioned in print, but they have 
never been explained in a connected and compre- 
hensive manner so as to give a true idea of their 
magnitude and dangerous character; and because 
they have not been understood, they have been 
treated by American authors, journalists and offi- 
cials generally, as relatively unimportant, and not 
inconsistent with the baseless claim that our na- 
tional constitution is the best in the world in se- 
curing the welfare of the multitude. 

I here present the compilation and explanation 
which others have neglected to make. By quota- 
tions from a multitude of high and undisputed 
authorities, I prove that our government is a dis- 
grace to us a people. I show that no other en- 

(3) 



4 PREFACE. 

lightened nation fails, so lamentably, to perform 
its duties of defining and protecting the rights of 
its citizens, in matters relating to person and 
property. I collect many predictions by wise and 
learned men that we are rapidly advancing 
toward bankruptcy and national collapse. Many 
intelligent Americans, after carefully considering 
the facts here presented, will say, "We must re- 
form these evils without delay." 

A list of the books, from which citations are 
made, is given in the last chapter. 

JOHN S. HITTELL. 

Pioneer Hall, San Francisco, 

September 9th, 1900. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

DIVIDED SOVEREIGNTY. 

Section. Page. 

1. Three Main Evils 11 

2. Federal Weakness 11 

3. Federal Treason 17 

4. Nullification 19 

5. Cherokee Expulsion 23 

6. Double Citizenship 25 

7. Unprotected Eights 26 

8. Suffrage Denied 27 

9. Strike-Rebellions 30 

10. Missouri-Pacific 31 

11. Pittsburg 31 

12. Homestead 32 

13. Pullman 33 

14. Wardner. 36 

15. Pana 37 

16. Leadville 39 

17. St. Louis 39 



G CONTENTS. 

Section. Page. 

18. Griffin 40 

19. Lynch Law 41 

20. Koszta 44 

21. Italians Mobbed «... 45 

22. Vigilance 47 

23. Federalism Reviewed 50 

CHAPTER II. 

CONFLICT OF DEPARTMENTS, 

Section. Page. 

24. Checks 56 

25. Divided Responsibility 59 

26. The Committee System 62 

27. Bagehot and Maine 61 

28. Schuyler 67 

29. Log-Roiling 68 

30. Lobby 69 

31. Private Bills 71 

32. Slip-Shod Laws 74 

33. Discordant Laws 78 

34. Federal Senate 79 

35. Finances 83 

36. Presidential Impeachment 89 

37. Nullifying Courts 90 

38. Military Discord 90 

39. Conflict Review 93 



CONTENTS. 7 

CHAPTER III. 

THE SPOILS. 

Section. Page. 

40. The Party 94 

41. The Machine 100 

42. The Boss 102 

43. The Cinch 105 

44. The Organ 109 

45. The Club 110 

46. The Convention Ill 

47. Internal Improvements 115 

48. Demagogism 117 

49. Rotation 120 

50. Office Begging 122 

51. Inexperience 128 

52. Corruption 131 

53. Election Frauds 134 

54. Broderick 135 

55. Clark 137 

56. War Frauds 138 

57. Simon Cameron 141 

58. Gideon Wells 143 

59. Belknap. 146 

60. Sanborn 147 

61. New York Customs 148 



8 CONTENTS. 

Section. Page. 

62. Senatorial Courtesy 152 

63. Spoils Legislation 155 

64. Judicial Abuses 155 

65. Cities 158 

66. A. D. White 161 

67. Tweed 163 

68. San Francisco 166 

69. Cincinnati 168 

70. Scale of Infamy 170 

71. Unfit Presidents 170 

72. Presidential Candidates 175 

73. Purity Promises 177^ 

74. Decline 181 

CHAPTER IV. 

PERIL. 

Section. Page. 

75. Warnings 183 

76. Kent and Webster 184 

77. James Bryce 185 

78. Harper 186 

79. Hoist ...* 186 

80. Mill 188 

81. Lecky 190 



CONTENTS. 9 

Section. Page. 

82. Burnett.. 191 

83. McCracken 192 

84. Bradford 192 

85. Hyslop 193 

86. Rush 194 

87. Wright 195 

88. Various Croakings 196 

89. Tropical Colonies 200 

90. Negro Demoralization 201 

91. Parallel Predictions 202 

CHAPTER V. 

REFORM. 

Section. Page. 

92. Remedies 203 

93. My Plan 205 

94. New Constitution 207 

95. Remarks 211 

96. Our Present Constitution 218 

97. British Constitution 223 

98. Comparisons,. 226 

99. Other Plans 228 

100. Suffrage Restriction 229 

101. Burnett's Plan 231 



10 CONTENTS, 

Section. Page. 

102. Stickney's Plan 232 

103. Moffett's Plan 234 

104. Hyslop's Plan 234 

105. Ford's Plan 235 

106. Seaman's Plan 235 

107. Despair 236 

108. Conclusion 238 



Sectio 
109. 


CHAPTEE VI. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY, 
n. 
List of Books 


Page. 
241 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 



CHAPTER I. 

DIVIDED SOVEREIGNTY. 

Section 1. Three Main Evils, — In several im- 
portant points, the government of the United 
States is more defective than that of any other 
enlightened country and, as a whole, it is inferior 
to many others. It is so bad that it is not only 
disgraceful but highly dangerous to the American 
people, as the judicious reader will admit after 
reading a truthful statement of the facts, to be 
submitted to him in this book. 

Its main defects are three; first, Divided Sov- 
ereignty, whereby many of the highest political 
powers, that should belong to a national govern- 
ment, are improperly distributed among forty- 
five provinces or so-called states; second, Strife 
between Branches, because of the lack of a proper 
subordination and responsibility in official au- 
thority; and third, the Spoils System which fills 
a large proportion of the governmental offices 
with dishonest or incompetent men. 

Sec. 2. Federal Weakness. — The Constitution of 
the United States, as Madison said in the Fed- 

(li) 



12 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

eralist, when pleading for its adoption, is a federal 
not a national document. It does not apply the 
word national or sovereign, to any of its offices. 
While combining to employ federal officials to 
manage certain foreign and interstate affairs of 
subordinate importance, the states retain exclu- 
sive control over suffrage, education, marriage, 
inheritance, land titles, contracts, corporations 
and crime, and exclusive power to protect the 
most precious rights of person and property con- 
nected with these branches of law. A divided 
sovereignty implies an insecure allegiance, a 
questionable patriotism, and an unsatisfactory 
protection of the citizen. The constitution allows 
Congress to provide a uniform method of nat- 
uralizing aliens, but not to define the privileges 
of the citizenship thus created. It declares that 
"the citizens of each state shall 5 be entitled to all 
the privileges of citizens in the several states," 
as if the only citizenship were that of the state, 
but this promise is not supported by any proper 
sanction or method of enforcement and therefore 
never has been enforced. Before 1865, the slave 
states generally refused to recognize the citizen- 
ship and equal civil and political rights of the 
colored citizens of New England and North Caro- 
lina which latter state gave citizenship and suf- 
frage to colored freemen owning a certain amount 
of property. The central government made no 
attempt to protect the rights of these citizens; by 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 13 

its inaction, it confessed its impotence and it con- 
tinues the same conduct now. 

The Federal Constitution declares that it shall 
be "the supreme law of the land" and orders that 
the members of Congress, "and of the several 
state legislatures, and all executive and judicial 
officers both of the United States and the several 
states shall be bound by oath or affirmation to 
support this constitution." The federal power is 
"supreme" in foreign and interstate relations; 
but as these are not one-twentieth part in number 
and importance of the aggregate relations of life, 
the supremacy is limited to a narrow range. As 
to the oath of allegiance to the Union, that was 
long treated as a nullity. Vermont was admitted 
in 1793 and Kentucky in 1799 with constitutions 
which prescribed the precise form of the oath to 
be taken by their officials and the state constitu- 
tion was mentioned as the only sovereignty to 
which they were bound. Massachusetts, New 
Hampshire, Georgia and Maryland long pre- 
served the same oath, thus refusing to recognize 
the federal supremacy. 

In their constitutions for many years before the 
civil war, two of the states (Massachusetts and 
New Hampshire) declared that they were "free, 
sovereign and independent"; two others (Maine 
and Florida) that they were "free and independ- 
ent" ; Ehode Island that its constitution was "the 
supreme law of the land" ; and Maryland asserted 



14 REFORM OR REVOLUTI02>TV 

that "the people of this state ought to have the 
sole and exclusive right of regulating the internal 
government and police thereof." All the state 
constitutions indicate, by their form, that they 
emanate from a power which has most of the at- 
tributes of sovereignty; everything, that they do 
not prohibit, may be done by the officials; where- 
as the federal government may do only the acts 
for which power is given. One is a limitation 
and the other is a grant of power; one defines a 
government, the other creates an agency. 

The official name, given to the federation in the 
constitution, — "the United States of America" — ■ 
is objectionable on linguistic grounds. It is not 
good English. States may unite, but when they 
do, they become one state. By the act of union, 
they cease to be plural and become singular. 
The word state, (like its equivalents slaat, etat, 
stato, estado and so forth in other modern lan- 
guages) means an independent nation, a separate 
people under a completely sovereign political 
organization. Some persons have said that "The 
United States" should be used as a singular noun 
as in the phrase "the United States is a nation"; 
but the framers of the constitution did not think 
so; they said "treason against the United States 
shall consist only in levying war against them and 
adhering to their enemies." 

Our federal name is objectionable on geo- 
graphical as well as on linguistic grounds. The 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 15 

states which form the Union are not the states "of 
America" but only of part of North America. 
When our country acquires a proper nationality, 
it should have a suitable name, a name in the 
singular number, a single word, conveying the 
idea of complete sovereignty as does France or 
Italy or Spain. 

In 1798 the legislature of Kentucky adopted 
a series of resolutions drafted by Jefferson, de- 
claring that the Union is a compact to which 
"each state acceded as a state," and that, "as in 
all other cases of compact among parties having 
no common judge, each party has an equal right 
to judge for itself, as well of the infractions, as 
of the mode of redress.*' The plain meaning of 
this language is that every state had a constitu- 
tional right to annul federal laws or to withdraw 
from the Union at any time without the consent of 
its associates. In the same year the legislature 
of Virginia adopted a series of similar resolutions 
drafted by Madison, asserting that "a spirit has 
been manifested by the federal government to en- 
large its power by forced constructions of the 
constitutional charter which defines them . . . 
so as to consolidate the states by degrees into one 
sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable 
result of which would be to transform the present 
republican system of the United States into an 
absolute or at best a mixed monarchy." The 
Congressional caucus of the Anti-federal party 



16 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

(which elected Jefferson to the presidency) in its 
declaration of principles accused the Federalists 
of plotting to convert the presidency and the fed- 
eral senatorships into hereditary offices. The 
elections of Jefferson in 1800 and 1804 and of 
Madison in 1808 and 1812 (as representatives of 
the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions) and of 
Pierce in 1852 and of Buchanan in 1856, on plat- 
forms explicitly approving those resolutions, were 
partisan declarations that the right of secession 
was part of the law of the land. 

By asserting that each state has full authority 
to decide whether the compact has been broken 
and to adopt its own remedy, these "Kentucky 
and Virginia resolutions," as they are called, 
plainly mean that every state may either prohibit 
the enforcement, within its limits, of any federal 
law which it dislikes or may secede without break- 
ing its promise to the other states. This is the 
interpretation which was given, by many lawyers, 
to these resolutions when they were first pub- 
lished; and it will remain sound so long as the 
phrases about infraction and redress have any 
obvious signification. Jefferson so understood 
them, and with his knowledge and approval, 
about the time when the legislature of Virginia, 
under his influence, declared its hostility to the 
idea of an indissoluble Union, it provided for the 
construction of an armory and the purchase of 
arms, to be used against the national forces, in 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 17 

case of hostilities caused by a defiance of the fed- 
eral authority. (Hoist. 1. 178). 

Sec. 3. Federal Treason. — Those portions of the 
federal constitution relating to military affairs 
are disgracefully weak. Nothing forbids the 
states to maintain their own armies and navies, 
under their own officers, their own flags, their own 
uniforms, their own commissions and their own 
oaths of allegiance; nothing in the law prevents 
them from building their own /forts and fleets, or 
laying in unlimited supplies or acting in concert 
to prepare for resisting the federal government. 
Until a state has given its own permission, the 
President has no control over its militia, and the 
refusal of a Governor to call them out when or- 
dered or requested by the President is not a pun- 
ishable offense. 

Under the influence of mean state jealousy, the 
federal constitution restricts treason to the levy- 
ing of war against the Union. So long as there 
is no war there is no treason. "Without violating 
the federal constitution state officials may urge 
the most treasonable ideas and most hostile plans 
in speech or print, may denounce the President 
as a usurper, may assert that some defeated can- 
didate is the true head of the nation, may make 
it a criminal offense to furnish any necessary of 
life to a federal officer, may adopt statutes that 
will effectually prevent the punishment of those 
who murder federal officials, and may adopt com- 



18 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

nion plans for enlisting large armies, purchasing 
numerous ships of war, giving the command of 
their troops and vessels to the same general and 
the same admiral, and exacting oaths of alle- 
giance to the state exclusively. And all this can 
be done without committing treason under the 
Federal Constitution. 

The British Government has a better idea of its 
dignity and duty. It provides that the speech of 
citizens hostile to the nation shall be punished as 
treason. Two hundred years ago the Briton who 
said in writing or print that the Pretender was 
the lawful King, was hanged. The statute was 
enforced and the Jacobites treated it with punc- 
tilious civility. We need some legislation, based 
on the same principle, in these United States. 

The assertion has been made frequently that 
there will never be another attempt at secession 
in this country, but such prophecies are cheap 
and worthless. Under the present political 
system, no confidence can be placed in the plat- 
form promises of the American people. They do 
not know today what they will do tomorrow. By 
electing Jefferson and Madison, they accepted the 
doctrines of nullification and secession, and yet 
they applauded Jackson when he threatened to 
hang Calhoun. After the lapse of some years, 
they again sanctioned those same principles of 
nullification and secession by electing Pierce and 
again by electing Buchanan and while these 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION"? 19 

promises to let the South go in peace were yet 
fresh in their mouths, they overwhelmed the 
Secessionists with blood and fire of the Civil War. 
The Democratic leaders of the North were ready 
to make pretenses that would catch votes, but 
they could not control their followers when the 
Union was in danger of dissolution. 

Today the people are ardently attached to the 
Union; tomorrow one-third or two-fifths of them 
may be its bitter enemies. If there should be an- 
other rebellion, its managers will profit by the 
mistakes of the last one. They will not be in so 
much haste to rush into hostilities, but will 
fortify their territory, arm and drill their people, 
buy ships, educate their officers, and abstain from 
the commission of Federal treason until they are 
ready to strike the decisive blow with success. 
They will rely for success on themselves; not on 
their allies in other states. 

Sec. 4. Nullification. — The nation was dishon- 
ored by its failure to properly punish the gross 
defiance and insult given to it by the Nullification 
Ordinance of South Carolina, adopted November 
24th, 1832, by a vote of one hundred and thirty- 
six ayes to twenty-six noes, in the State conven- 
tion convened for the special purpose of taking 
such action. This ordinance declared that the 
tariff acts of 1828 and 1832, and all contracts 
made to secure the payment of duties under them, 
and all judicial proceedings to affirm their val- 



20 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

idity, should be "held utterly null and void." The 
ordinance provided further that no lawsuit involv- 
ing the validity of this ordinance or of any act of 
the legislature for its enforcement should be ap- 
pealed to the federal Supreme Court, and any per- 
son attempting to take such an appeal should be 
punished for contempt of the state court. It was 
provided further that every officer of the state 
should take an oath to obey and execute this ordi- 
nance. Finally the Convention declared that "we 
the people of South Carolina/' would not "submit 
to the application of force, on the part of the fed- 
eral government, to reduce this state to obe- 
dience," but would "consider the passage by Con- 
gress of any act authorizing the employment of a 
military or naval force against the state of South 
Carolina" as inconsistent with the longer contin- 
uance of South Carolina in the Union and would 
"forthwith proceed to organize a separate gov- 
ernment." 

President Jackson on December 10th 1832 is- 
sued a proclamation explaining the pretensions of 
South Carolina and warning the people of that 
state that he would enforce the laws. After hav- 
ing stated the facts and constitutional principles 
involved he said "This then is the position in 
which we stand. A small majority of the citizens 
of one State in the Union have elected delegates 
to a State convention; that Convention has or- 
dained that all the revenue laws of the United 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 21 

States must be repealed, or that they are no 
longer a member of the Union. The Governor of 
that State has recommended to the legislature the 
raising of an army to carry the secession into 
effect, and that he may be empowered to give 
clearances to vessels in the name of the State. No 
act of violent opposition to the laws has yet been 
committed, but such a state of things is hourly 
apprehended; and it is the intent of this instru- 
ment to proclaim, not only that the duty imposed 
on me by the Constitution 'to see that the laws 
be faithfully executed/ shall be performed to the 
extent of the powers already vested in me by law, 
or of such others as the wisdom of Congress shall 
devise and entrust to me for that purpose, but to 
warn the citizens of South Carolina who have 
been deluded into an opposition to the laws, of the 
danger they will incur by obedience to the illegal 
and disorganizing ordinance of the convention; 
to exhort those who have refused to support it 
to persevere in their determination to uphold the 
constitution and laws of their country; and to 
point out to all the perilous situation into which 
the good people of the State have been led, and 
that the course they are urged to pursue is one 
of ruin and disgrace to the very State whose rights 
they affect to support. . . . 

"Fellow citizens of the United States! The 
threat of unhallowed disunion, — the names of 
those once respected, by whom it was uttered, 



22 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

the array of military force to support it, denote 
the approach of a crisis in our affairs, on which 
the continuance of our unexampled prosperity, 
our political existence, and perhaps that of all 
free governments, may depend. The conjuncture 
demanded a free, a full, and explicit enunciation, 
not only of my intentions, but of my principles of 
action; and, as the claim was asserted of a right 
by a State to annul the laws of the Union, and 
even to secede from it at pleasure, a frank exposi- 
tion of my opinions in relation to the origin and 
form of our Government, and the construction 
I give to the instrument by which it was created, 
seemed to be proper. Having the fullest confi- 
dence in the justness of the legal and constitu- 
tional opinion of my duties, which has been ex- 
pressed, I rely, with equal confidence, on your un- 
divided support in my determination to execute 
the laws, to preserve the Union by all constitu- 
tional means, to arrest, if possible, by moderate 
but firm measures, the necessity of a recourse to 
force; and, if it be the will of Heaven, that the 
recurrence of its primeval curse on man for the 
shedding of a brother's blood should fall upon our 
land, that it be not called down by any offensive 
act on the part of the United States." 

After all this brave talk, Congress adopted and 
Jackson signed a compromise bill reducing the 
import duties which 'provoked the defiance of 
South Carolina. She was the real victor in this 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 23 

controversy, and thus and otherwise was en- 
couraged to secede thirty years later. 

Sec. 5. Cherokee Expulsion. — The federal govern- 
ment was defeated humiliated and dishonored by 
the state of Georgia in a controversy about the 
Cherokee Indians between the years 1825 and 
1830. Under all the administrations, Congress 
and the President recognized the larger Indian 
tribes within the territory of the United States 
as independent or semi-independent nationalities, 
and as such, treaties were made with them to 
purchase lands from them, to set aside other lands 
for their occupation, and to pay them annuities. 
One of the tribes with which such treaties had 
been made was that of the Cherokees, for whom 
a large reservation in Northern Georgia had been 
set apart, (with a promise that it should be theirs 
forever) by a treaty to which no objection was 
made by the state officials when it was formed, 
submitted to the Senate for ratification and rati- 
fied. About 1820 some of the people of that state 
became greedy for this land and in 1825 the state 
as a whole determined to have it, whether the 
treaty were violated or not and whether the fed- 
eral authorities were willing or not. The legis- 
lature ordered a survey which the federal law 
and President Adams forbade. Gov. Troup an- 
nounced that the survey should be made neverthe- 
less and the President gave orders to the federal 
troops to protect the Cherokee reservation. The 



24 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

legislature appealed to all the states from Vir- 
ginia and Missouri to the gulf to unite in resist- 
ing the federal power. The other states gave no 
military aid but their newspapers and politicians 
encouraged the rebellious spirit. A man who had 
committed murder in the Cherokee territory was 
arrested by state officials, tried and condemned to 
death by a state court in violation of the treaty 
which gave the Indians exclusive jurisdiction 
over all crimes committed within their reserva- 
tion. The convicted man appealed to the Federal 
Supreme Court which issued a writ of review. 
Georgia defied the mandate of the federal tribunal 
and hanged the man. The state also imprisoned 
some missionaries who were living on the Chero- 
kee reservation without a state license, which last 
was devised for the purpose of excluding white 
men who would advise the Indians how to protect 
their rights. One of these missionaries appealed 
to the Federal Supreme Court which decided that 
the license law was void and the imprisonment 
under it illegal. This judgment did not come till 
Jackson was President, and as he hated the Cher- 
okees and John Adams and John Marshall the 
Chief Justice of the United States, and adapted 
his opinions to his passions, he refused to en- 
force the order of the Court. He said "John Mar- 
shall has made his decision, let him enforce it." 
The federal troops were withdrawn from the 
reservation, the Cherokees were given up to their 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 25 

enemies; their land was taken, and they were 
driven away to the region west of , the Mississippi, 
and the authority of the United States was de- 
feated and disgraced. 

Sec. 6. Double Citizenship. — If one citizen of Cali- 
fornia sues another, he must bring his action in 
a state court, before a judge elected, for a short 
term, by the people; but if he sues a citizen of 
Oregon he may take his case to a federal court be- 
fore a judge appointed for life by the President. 
The difference of these jurisdictions is often of 
great pecuniary importance, and implies a serious 
inequality in the rights attached to residence. 
Double citizenship, double allegiances, double 
governmental protections and double jurisdictions 
in the same class of lawsuits, all imply political 
blundering. An alien also has the choice of be- 
ginning his suit in a federal or a state court, thus 
giving him a decided advantage over a citizen, 
who applies to a court in a civil case, in his own 
state. 

The federal government not only fails to per- 
form its highest duty, that of protecting its citi- 
zens, but it proclaims the fact that the exclusive 
power to protect them belongs to the states. Mur- 
der and arson and riot may rage publicly over ex- 
tensive districts for week after week in its terri- 
tory without the least obstruction by the forces of 
the United States. By its impotence in many 
places where it should be master, it exposes it- 
self to hatred and contempt. 



26 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 7. Unprotected Rights.- — The highest duty of 
government is to protect the rights of its people; 
and in our country, this duty belongs, legally not 
to the nation but to the state which has exclusive 
jurisdiction over the relations of parent and child, 
husband and wife, master and servant, landlord 
and tenant, seller and buyer, and criminal and vic- 
tim of crime. The nation has citizens but has not 
the constitutional power to guard them against 
oppression. It can talk much and do little. 

More than a hundred American citizens are 
murdered, in the average year, by mobs, — in ex- 
ceptional years more than three hundred, — with- 
out punishment, without serious prosecution and 
without violation of federal law. If a general of 
the United States, while marching at the head of 
a large national army through Chicago or any 
other American city, should find himself in the 
midst of a great riot, and should see a mob mas- 
sacre a hundred men and set fire to a thousand 
houses, he would have no official right to interfere, 
though solicited to do so by the citizens by the 
mayor; or by the city council, and it may be 
doubted whether he could properly interfere at 
the request of the Governor, until after the latter 
had satisfied the President of the United States 
that he could not convene the legislature. 

In a proclamation issued October 17th, 1876, 
President Grant said "It has been satisfactorily 
shown that insurrection and domestic violence 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 27 

exist in several counties in the state of South 
Carolina and that certain combinations of men 
against the law exist in many counties of the 
state, known as 'rifle clubs/ who ride up and down 
by day and night in arms, murdering some peace- 
ful citizens and intimidating others." This com- 
plaint of a wide-spread, very serious and long-con- 
tinuing wrong was not followed by any punish- 
ment of the offenders, nor by any respectable at- 
tempt to punish them. 

After the officials of South Carolina, under the 
authority of a local law, had repeatedly imprison- 
ed colored citizens of Massachusetts who as sail- 
ors or ship cooks entered the harbor of Charles- 
ton, and had kept them in jail till their vessels 
were about to sail away, in 1844, Samuel Hoar, a 
lawyer of Boston was sent by his state to plead the 
rights of these men in the courts, under the fed- 
eral constitution; but his stay was very brief, for 
he was driven out by a mob, sanctioned by the 
leading men of the city and of the state govern- 
ment, and told that if he should return, the mob 
would promptly take his life. The Union did 
nothing in this case. 

Sec. 8. Suffrage Denied. — Year after year for a 
quarter of a century, the federal government has 
violated its public promise to hundreds of thou- 
sands of its colored citizens that they should be al- 
lowed to have a share in the government as 
voters. It has the excuse that it has not power 



28 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

enough to keep its promise, but why should it con- 
tinue to exist if it cannot perform the most im- 
portant of its duties? Why not make way for an- 
other government that can protect its citizens? 
Why not revoke the promise which it cannot 
keep? The intelligent white men of South Caro- 
lina, Mississippi, Louisiana and Georgia say that 
the exclusion of the negroes from the polls is ab- 
solutely necessary for the protection of life and 
property and public order; and that they are 
compelled to violate the law at every election for 
the purpose of preventing anarchy. They have a 
right to complain of being subjected to such a 
compulsion. The following table shows the 
population of some southern states in 1890, the 
number of votes which they cast at the Presiden- 
tial election in 1896, and the percentage of votes 
as compared with the total population in each of 
these states and in all the states: 



1 






Per 


States. 


Population. 


Vote. 


cent. 


Alabama 


1,513,017 


194,572 


13 


Arkansas 


1,128,179 


149,397 


13 


Florida 


391,422 


46,461 


11 


Georgia 


1,837,353 


163,061 


9 


Louisiana 


1,118,587 


101,045 


9 


Mississippi 


1,289,600 


70,566 


6 


S. Carolina 


1,151,149 


68,907 


6 


All States 


61,908,906 


14,073,285 


21 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 29 

Among a hundred people in the United States 
the average number who voted at the Presiden- 
tial election in 1896 was twenty-one; but in two 
of the states, where the proportion of negroes is 
largest, the number was only six; in two others 
it was nine; in one it was eleven and in two thir- 
teen. At least 800,000 negroes, who had a legal 
right to vote and who would have liked to vote, 
stayed away from the polls for fear of being 
beaten or killed if they insisted on voting. 

This treatment of the negroes and whites in 
the cotton states suggests other interests besides 
those of the victims of the oppression. Though 
reason and justice are often grossly and persist- 
ently abused, they have a habit of occasionally 
squaring accounts with a rudeness proportioned 
to the magnitude of their wrongs. The conduct of 
our rulers towards its negro citizens has a queer 
counterpart in the quixotic enterprise of giving 
"a stable independent government," (so the pur- 
pose has been officially defined) to the inferior, 
alien, and ignorant tropical mulattoes and ne- 
groes of Cuba, — an enterprise undertaken at the 
demand and with the cooperation of both the 
great political parties of our country. The ex- 
ample that we have set, of interfering to give 
political power to people, unfit for it, is too 
foolish to stimulate European nations to meddle 
in our internal affairs with a similar motive. 



30 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 9. Strike-Rebellions. — Our country has been 
disgraced by a number of Trade Union strikes 
which developed into prolonged, extensive and 
destructive rebellions, never equalled elsewhere 
because no other land combines an industry so 
highly advanced with a government so feeble in 
its dealings with internal disorders. Great 
strikes have been numerous in England, but their 
greatness there in the last generation has been 
confined to the long abstention from work by 
many men; whereas the worst American strikes 
have been distinguished by their insurrectionary 
violence, their public murders and massacres, 
their battles with troops, their immense destruc- 
tion of property, their wholesale robberies, 
their control over the local police, militia and 
magistrates, and the inability of the government 
to punish the criminals. 

A government cannot protect its citizens nor 
give them a proper moral education without pun- 
ishing crime promptly and severely; and this re- 
mark applies as much to the crime actuated by a 
false conception of political right, — such as the 
assassination of a ruler, or the anarchical de- 
struction of private or public property, — as to 
that actuated by personal greed or malice. Of 
the numerous great crimes committed by mobs 
in the United States, not one has ever been prop- 
erly punished; and the consequence is a danger- 
ous condition of public feeling in many cities. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 31 

Sec. 10. Missouri Pacific. — The great Missouri 
Pacific Kailway strike began at Marshall, Texas, 
by order of the Knights of Labor on the 1st of 
March, 1888, and was maintained for three 
months without interference by the federal au- 
thorities, except that a Congressional Committee 
investigated the matter and advised the strikers 
to compromise on the basis that those who had 
not been guilty of violence should be restored to 
their places. The railways affected by this 
strike had an aggregate length of 5,000 miles, em- 
ployed 10,000 men, and furnished transportation 
for 4,000,000 people, occupying an area of 400,000 
square miles. A large amount of property was 
destroyed; besides the men in the railway ser- 
vice, a very large number of others were deprived 
of employment, and the total money loss was es- 
timated to be $20,000,000 of which the railway 
companies lost $5,500,000. The Governors of Mis- 
souri, Kansas, Arkansas and Texas, each, issued 
a proclamation urging the people to protect the 
property which the strikers were destroying or 
injuring; and several of them called out the 
militia to aid in the preservation of order; but 
they did not appeal to the federal authorities. 

Sec. 11. Pittsburg. — In June, 1877, a great 
strike of railway laborers paralyzed business in 
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois 
and Kentucky. Among its results were the mur- 
der of fifty persons, the serious wounding of one 



32 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

hundred others, the destruction of property 
worth $10,000,000, the disturbance of business in- 
flicting losses of at least $25,000,000 additional 
on individuals, and the stopping of traffic on 
6,000 miles of railway. In Pittsburg it became 
most violent, a mob held control for more than 
twenty-four hours; the large railway station was 
burned; a hundred locomotives were ruined by 
fire, and merchandise was stolen from hundreds 
of freight cars. The militia were called out in 
Pittsburg, Baltimore and Chicago and in the last 
named city nineteen persons were killed in a con- 
flict between the troops and the rioters. The 
federal authority did nothing to repress or pun- 
ish the crimes of this great strike. 

Sec. 12. Homestead. — In June, 1892, the men 
employed in the Homestead Iron Works near 
Pittsburg struck, and threatened to destroy the 
mills. The employers brought two hundred and 
seventy Pinkerton men from Chicago to protect 
their property. The news of this importation of 
defenders gave great offense to the Trade Unions 
of Pittsburg and vicinity, and they prepared a re- 
ception for the strangers. They stationed them- 
selves on the bank of the river, — the Pinkertons 
came in a boat, — and when it was near the land- 
ing place, the Unionists attacked the boat with 
rifles and a cannon. The result was that seven- 
teen men were killed and thirty-five wounded, 
and the Pinkertons were driven away. The 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 33 

strike lasted five months, caused thirty-five vio- 
lent deaths, inflicted a loss of |4,000,000 on the 
Homestead Company, and a loss of much more 
on people not members of the Company. This 
strike did not come within the range of federal 
law. 

Sec. 13. Pullman. — The Pullman Eailway 
strike occurred in June, 1894, and was, in some 
respects, a very notable affair. The Pullman 
Palace Car Company had its shops in a town all 
the land and houses of whic'h it owned. It em- 
ployed hundreds of men, paid them good wages, 
gave them steady employment, and made sacri- 
fices to provide them with comfortable homes 
and good surroundings. Throughout the United 
States business was greatly depressed in 1893 
and 1894, and the Company finding that it could 
not sell its cars at cost, after losing f 50,000, in- 
stead of dismissing half of its workmen, made a 
relatively small reduction in wages so that half 
the subsequent loss should fall on the laborers 
and half on the company. Some of the me- 
chanics planned a strike against this reduction 
and, for the purpose of having strong support, 
joined the American Eailway Union (a Trade 
Union) which had 150,000 members, and which, 
-as it claimed to be composed entirely of men em- 
ployed by railway companies, should not have 
admitted car-builders. The Eailway Union sent 
a committee of Pullman laborers to the office of 



34 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

the Pullman Company to demand a restoration 
of the former rate of wages. The Vice Presi- 
dent, who was the acting head of the Company, 
told the committee that a little time would be re- 
quired for the examination of their representa- 
tions and that they should soon have an answer; 
and he assured them that no one of the com- 
mittee would be discharged for his action as a 
committeeman. Several days later a foreman, 
who knew nothing of what had been done at the 
meeting, discharged two members of the com- 
mittee temporarily, because just then there was 
nothing in the Shop for them to do. The Rail- 
way Union assumed that this "laying off" or tem- 
porary discharge was a deliberate violation of 
the Vice President's promise on the 13th of June, 
ordered a strike and sent a demand to all the 
railway companies which had offices in Chicago 
that they should not haul Pullman cars in their 
trains. 

This preposterous demand was refused and 
thereupon the American Railway Union ordered 
all its men employed on these roads to quit work. 
The train men obeyed; they would not operate 
trains nor let others operate them. They made 
great riots; burned hundreds of cars; tore up 
tracks; paralyzed the railway traffic of a large 
part of the country; beat the outsiders who 
wanted to do the work and caused the death of a 
dozen persons, and the loss of $20,000,000 to the 
companies and the people. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 35 

As the companies were not permitted to trans- 
port the mails as they had been in the habit of 
doing and they had contracted to do, President 
Cleveland sent national troops to protect the 
trains and when the strikers interfered, a federal 
judge sent their leader to jail for contempt of 
court to ruminate for six months in durance. Of 
the numerous murders and other crimes com- 
mitted in this rebellion, for such it was, not one 
was punished under the law of the United 
States. The federal courts had no jurisdiction 
over these offenses, not even when the victims 
were officers of the federal army, slain while they 
were enforcing, and because they were enforcing 
the federal laws. A lieutenant of the federal 
army was murdered by strikers in California, — 
the disturbance crossed the continent — and the 
chief murderer was tried and convicted by a 
state not a federal court. 

The nation was placed in a humiliating posi- 
tion when it could not punish the interruption of 
its mails in any way except by treating it as a 
contempt of court. In reference to this affair 
H. J. Ford (286) says: "In assuming to regulate 
interstate commerce, Congress put upon the na- 
tional administration the responsibility of main- 
taining interstate railroads as national high- 
ways. The significance of this never dawned 
upon the country until the railroad strikes of 
1894 took place, when the arm of the federal 



36 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

power was suddenly extended to suppress riot 
and quell disorder. The popular belief had al- 
ways been that the national government could 
not act in such cases until requested by state au- 
thority, but now state authority was not only 
ignored, but its protests were unheeded. Time 
was when such action would have convulsed the 
nation and might have caused collision between 
state and federal authority, but the act was 
hailed with intense gratification both North and 
South; the governors who took up the old cry of 
state rights were loaded with derision, and a 
Congress, Democratic in both branches, passed 
resolutions by acclamation approving the action 
of the executive." 

This strike continued for several weeks and 
might have been maintained for months, but it 
soon collapsed when President Cleveland showed 
them that, if necessary, he would order an army 
to Chicago to fight the populace. The Governor 
of Illinois, a man utterly unfit for such a place, 
not only did not request federal aid but protested 
against federal intermeddling. 

Sec. 14. Wardner.— Between 1892 and 1899, the 
mining district near Wardner, Idaho, was the 
scene of many crimes committed by the members 
of the Miner's Union who beat, drove out, and 
murdered many good citizens, blew up two val- 
uable gold mills, destroyed much other property, 
terrorized and corrupted the officers of the law, 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 37 

defied the militia, gave them battle and defied 
the government. The criminals elected men of 
their own class to the county offices and those 
who should have enforced the law, participated in 
the mobs and committed perjury when brought 
before the state courts and compelled to give evi- 
dence about the crimes they had witnessed. On 
the 29th of May, 1899, a party of eight hundred 
men, gathered in the town of Burke, seized a 
railway train, went with it to Wardner and there 
blew up the Bunker Hill mill (which cost $200,- 
000), murdered one man, wounded several, 
and threatened many. The federal authority can- 
not punish any of these crimes. Of these eight 
hundred rioters and murderers, ten were con- 
victed and sentenced to brief terms of imprison- 
ment, because the Governor of Idaho was a man 
of superior character; and willing to ruin his 
political career rather than let such great crimes 
go without punishment. 

Sec. 15. Pana. — The coal mining region of cen- 
tral Illinois in which Pana is a prominent point 
has been in a riotous and rebellious condition fre- 
quently within the last ten years. In 1894, four 
officers of the law were seriously wounded, and 
the hoisting works of two mines were burned 
by members of the Miner's Union. These people 
were so violent, so arrogant and so criminal, that 
the owners of the coal mines determined to em- 
ploy negro miners, American citizens, who would 



38 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

be more peaceful and more faithful. On the 12th 
of October, 1898, fourteen persons, mostly negro 
miners were murdered, twenty were wounded, 
and all negroes in the town of Virden were forci- 
bly driven out. The governor of the state called 
out the state militia, not to enforce the laws, but 
to violate them, net to protect the orderly citi- 
zens of the United States but to assist the rebels 
against those laws to drive the negro laborers 
away. Two months later President McKinley 
delivered a long message to Congress on the polit- 
ical condition of the country, but said nothing 
about the murder of citizens and their unlawful 
expulsion from places where they had a right to 
be. Such wrongs were no part of the business of 
the United States; if these colored American 
citizens had gone to Mexico, or France, or China, 
or Germany, and had there been murdered or 
driven out by force, the President would have 
made a great blow about the wrongs. 

On the 9th of April, 1899, seven men were 
killed and nine wounded in a riot in Pana, and on 
the 17th of September, 1899 six negro miners 
were murdered at Cartersville in open daylight; 
and these crimes, witnessed by many men, have 
not been punished nor has any serious attempt 
been made to punish them. The strikers and 
murderers have numerous votes of which the offi- 
cials are afraid. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 39 

Sec. 16. Leadville. — Because their demand for 
an increase of daily pay from two dollars and 
fifty cents to three dollars was denied, the 
Union miners of Leadville, Colorado, struck 
in June, 1896; and threatened to burn the 
mills and hoisting works of the silver mines. 
The state militia were called out to protect the 
property and on the 21st of September there was 
a battle in which six persons were killed and a 
dozen seriously wounded. After the strike had 
continued nine months, and the community had 
lost $4,000,000, peace and quiet were restored. 
The federal authority did not interfere in this 
disturbance. 

Sec. 17. St. Louis. — A typical street-car strike, 
similar in its main features to many others in the 
cities of the United States, began in St. Louis on 
the 8th of May 1900, and continued more than a 
month, with riotous disorders on many days, 
frequent use of fire-arms and dynamite, a dozen 
violent deaths, many wounds, much damage by 
mobs to cars, tracks, buildings, employees and 
passengers; great pecuniary loss to many per- 
sons; the failure of the authorities of the law to 
protect person or property or to punish the crim- 
inals and the prosecution in the courts not of the 
rioters but of those citizens who, under the direc- 
tion of the law, resisted the mob. The officials 
of the city were guided by the precedents of in- 
efficiency in other cities and by the fear of losing 
the votes of the mob at the next election. 



40 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 18. Griffin. — The newspapers of the 25th 
of May 1899 published the following telegram 
sent on the previous day from Griffin, Georgia, 
"The flogging of three colored operatives of the 
Kincaid mills on Monday night by Whitecaps has 
led to sensational developments. Last night an- 
other negro was taken from his house and se- 
verely beaten and cut. These negroes are law- 
abiding citizens. To-day the superintendent and 
others at the Kincaid mills were notified to leave 
at once or they would be 'dealt with.' It now de- 
velops that there has been a club formed here 
known as the Laborer's Union Band, with the 
purpose of driving the negroes out of the country. 
The band has about five hundred members, a large 
number of whom are boys under age. Upon 
orders from the Governor the Griffin Eifles are in 
their armory awaiting orders from Judge Ham- 
mond to proceed to the factory. The Mayor has 
been reliably informed that if the militia go to 
the factory there will be trouble in the city to- 
night. He has ordered all the police on duty 
throughout the night." The journal from which 
that was cut gave no later news from Griffin; 
possibly, as often happens, the news collector of 
the place was warned that the climate would be 
unwholesome for him if he sent any more news 
over the wires about the local "labor troubles." 
The Griffin mob did what many other mobs in 
the cotton states have done; they forbade the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 41 

negroes to compete with white people who 
wanted to earn money in a certain branch of em- 
ployment. In such cases violence is threatened 
to the outsiders who wish to work and to the em- 
ployers who are anxious for their services; and 
the strikers, who interfere with the liberty of the 
two other classes, are criminals whom the com- 
munity tolerate or encourage and the law fails 
to punish. 

Sec. 19. Lynch Latv. — The following extract 
from a press telegram gives an account of a nota- 
ble case of American lynch law, with which the 
federal authorities have no concern because the 
victim was an American citizen tortured and 
murdered in his native state. "Maysville (Ky.), 
December 6. [1899] — Kichard Coleman, a negro, 
the confessed murderer of Mrs. James Lash- 
brook, wife of his employer, expiated his crime 
in daylight to-day at the hands of a mob, consist- 
ing of thousands of citizens, by burning at the 
stake after suffering torture and fright beyond 
description. The dreadful spectacle occurred on 
the peaceful cricket grounds of this, one of the 
oldest and among the proudest cities in Ken- 
tucky. The barbarities inflicted upon this young 
negro by citizens of one of the most highly civil- 
ized cities of the State are mostly beyond belief 
and can only be accounted for by the intense 
horror created by long consideration of the atro- 
cious crime of which full confession had been 
made by Coleman. 



42 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

"The mob carried Coleman to a small hollow 
near the railroad, where they bound him tightly 
to a young sapling. Then they heaped a pile of 
brushwood and timber around him and fired the 
stack. Some one cut his eyes out and in a mo- 
ment his head rolled around and he was believed 
to be dead. The scene was a fearful one. 
Around the funeral pyre were thousands of mad- 
dened people headed by the husband of the dead 
woman. A match was applied simultaneously 
and tongues of fire swept up and around the 
agonized wretch. 

"The place of execution had been selected 
weeks ago in accordance with all other arranged 
details of the programme mapped out by the 
leaders of the mob. The prisoner was dragged 
to the sapling and strapped against the tree and 
faced the husband of the victim. Large quanti- 
ties of dry brush and large bits of wood were 
piled around him while he was praying for 
speedy death. James Lashbrook, the husband 
of the victim, applied the first match to the 
brush. A brother of the victim struck the sec- 
ond match. Some one with a knife viciously 
slashed at the prisoner's chest. By a sort of 
cruel concurrence of action on the part of the 
mob not a shot was fired. The purpose seemed 
to be to give the wretch the greatest possible 
amount and duration of torture. A fatal shot 
would have been merciful, but there was no 
mercy in the crowd surrounding the murderer. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 43 

"As the flames arose Coleman's terror in- 
creased. He made vain efforts to withdraw his 
limbs from the encroaching fire and his eyes 
rolled in a frenzy of suffering. The ropes secur- 
ing him to the tree were burned and his body 
finally fell forward on the burning pile. Even 
then, although it was not certain whether he 
was living or dead, the vengeful purpose of the 
crowd led them to use rails and long poles to 
push his body back into the flames. It is not 
certain how long life lasted. During the process 
of burning, while his voice could be heard, he 
begged for a drink of water, his tongue protrud- 
ing and his eyeballs fairly starting from his head. 
At the end of three hours the body was practi- 
cally cremated. During all that time members 
of the family of Mrs. Lashbrook had remained to 
keep up the fire, and to keep the body in position 
where it would continue to burn. After three 
hours a nephew of Mrs. Lashbrook was still 
pushing the body on the burning embers, while a 
curious crowd of several thousand persons lin- 
gered on the scene." 

Maysville is a city of about 10,000 inhabitants 
and is situated on the southern bank of the Ohio. 
A thousand, if not thousands of outrages, similar 
to this one, have been committed in the United 
States, and not one has ever been punished, or 
made the subject of special complaint by a Pres- 
ident of the United States. He is quick to com- 



44 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

plain when one of our citizens is maltreated in 
Turkey or China. 

Sec. 20. Koszta. — Although the President and 
his generals and admirals aire powerless to pro- 
tect American citizens within the limits of the 
States, even subordinate officers have authority 
to give such protection in foreign lands and wa- 
ters. The most notable instance of such protec- 
tion occurred in the bay of Smyrna in July 1853 
when Capt. Ingraham of the sloop of war St. 
Louis demanded from an Austrian warship the 
surrender of Martin Koszta, a Hungarian who 
had declared his intention to become an Ameri- 
can citizen but had not been finally naturalized. 
This demand was accompanied by a threat that if 
denied, the guns should be brought into play. 
The Austrian Commander, fearful to assume re- 
sponsibility, gave up the man. The conduct of 
Ingraham was approved and justified, in diplo- 
matic correspondence, by President Pierce, and 
commended by Congress which ordered that a 
medal should be struck in honor of the event. 

The contrast between this extreme efficiency in 
protecting abroad one man who was not a citizen 
of the United States and the absolute inability 
to protect at home hundreds or thousands of na- 
tive born citizens is remarkable. The federal 
government is nowhere so weak as within its own 
territorv 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 45 

Sec. 21. Italians Mobbed. — A mob murdered 
some Italians in New Orleans in 1891, and the 
Italian government was not satisfied with obtain- 
ing an indemnity of f 5,000 for each of the victims 
but complained bitterly of the national govern- 
ment which did not punish, nor try to punish, 
nor possess the power to punish such interna- 
tional outrages. Benjamin Harrison, who was 
President at the time, makes the following re- 
marks about the affair in his book entitled This 
Country of Ours (123) "Some suggestions grow- 
ing out of this unhappy incident are worthy the 
attention of Congress. It would, I believe, be 
entirely competent for Congress to make offenses 
against the treaty rights of foreigners domiciled 
in the United States cognizable in the Federal 
Courts. This has not, however, been done. . . . 
It seems to me to follow, in this state of law, 
that the officers of the State charged with police 
and judicial powers in such cases must, in the 
consideration of international questions grow- 
ing out of such incidents, be regarded in such 
sense as Federal agents as to make this Govern- 
ment answerable for their acts in cases where it 
would be answerable if the United States had 
used its constitutional power to define and pun- 
ish crimes against treaty rights." 

While he was suggesting amendments to the 
law he might have proposed that the state which 
permits the murder of a man by a mob shall pay 



46 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

$10,000 damages to his family or relatives, and 
also that the citizen shonld have as much protec- 
tion as the alien. 

In 1899 another massacre of Italians, in Louis- 
iana, furnished the basis for the following tele- 
gram sent out from Washington on the 13tk of 
January 1900: "The Italian Government has 
signified to the Government of the United States 
in the polite and courteous way known to diplo- 
macy a wish that the persons guilty of lynching the 
five Italians at Talulah, La., last spring should 
be punished. Heretofore in cases of lynching of 
Italians the matter has been compromised !by the 
payment of an indemnity, but this does not meet 
the present demand of the Italian Government. 

"As under the existing law the trial and pros- 
ecution of such cases as this is left entirely to the 
state authorities, the National Government is 
well nigh helpless to meet the request of the 
Italian Government. The investigation made by 
the State of Louisiana was so unsatisfactory that 
the National Government undertook an investi- 
gation by its own agents to learn the facts at- 
tending the lynching. The result of this inquiry 
is now on file. But the United States Govern- 
ment cannot make the report the basis of any 
legal proceedings against the lynchers. As an 
outcome of this embarrassing position the Presi- 
dent will probably make fresh representations to 
Congress, urging the speedy passage of the 'bills 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 47 

intended to remove from state courts jurisdiction 
in cases where persons claiming treaty protec- 
tion are the victims and transferring jurisdiction 
over them to the Federal courts." 

Sec. 22. Vigilance. — The impotence of the fed- 
eral government has been shown in many histori- 
cal cases. One of the most noted was that of the 
San Francisco Vigilance Committee of 1856, 
which was master of the city for three months. 
It included many of the leading merchants, bank- 
ers and educated men of the city, and had 5000 
members, whom it armed, drilled and kept under 
strict discipline. It was the most orderly and 
admirable mob the world has ever seen; it re- 
belled against one of the most corrupt bosses and 
municipal rings in the United States. On the 
21st of May it marched with muskets and a can- 
non to the city jail, compelled the sheriff to let it 
take out two murderers, whom it imprisoned for 
three days in its own prison, and then after try- 
ing and convicting, publicly hanged in open day, 
the leaders and members of the Committee show- 
ing their faces and making no secret of their re- 
sponsibility. The Committee afterwards ar- 
rested and executed two other murderers with 
equal deliberation and publicity. They ban- 
ished twenty ballot-box stuffers whose crimes 
were not punishable with death under the law, 
and forbade them to return under penalty of the 
gallows. They imprisoned D. S. Terry, Chief 



48 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Justice of the Supreme Court of the State, seven 
weeks and did not liberate him until the physi- 
cians declared that the committee's officer whom 
Terry had wounded, would recover. They held 
military control of the city for three months 
while the state authorities were powerless. The 
Governor appealed to U. S. Major General 
Wool but he would do nothing because he said 
the Governor could convene the legislature and 
did not do so. To assemble the legislature 
would require at least a month, — at that time 
there were few miles of railway or telegraph in 
the state — and such a delay in dealing with a 
mob was ridiculous. 

Terry came to the city to see what he could 
do to assist in the enforcement of the state au- 
thority and in his presence an agent of the Com- 
mittee undertook to arrest a man. Terry 
stabbed and dangerously wounded this agent 
and was thereupon seized and kept in prison for 
seven weeks, until the wounded man was out of 
danger. A state Court issued a writ of Habeas 
Corpus for Terry's release, but the state authori- 
ties were powerless, so the writ was practically a 
nullity. Thereupon an application was made to 
Judge McAllister of the U. S. Circuit Court, but 
he kept the matter under consideration for weeks 
until Terry was at liberty. To refuse or delay 
the issuance of a Habeas Corpus writ is a very 
serious judicial offense, in a case over which the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 49 

Court has jurisdiction; but in this case, the im- 
prisonment of Terry was a matter that came un- 
der the exclusive control of the state laws. No 
censure was pronounced by the President or 
Congress on General Wool or Judge McAllister; 
they were treated as if they had done their whole 
duty. 

The Governor after failing to obtain help from 
Gen. Wool, applied to the President who refused 
to do anything, perhaps for the reasons that his 
interference might seriously injure the Demo- 
cratic party in the presidential election then near 
at hand, and that the Committee would probably 
have disbanded within the two months that must 
elapse between the sending of such an applica- 
tion, and the receipt of a response. 

Besides serving to illustrate the inability of 
the nation to protect its citizens, this Vigilance 
Committee is interesting as a proof that some of 
the American law is so bad that the l best citizens 
may combine for its violation, and may be hon- 
ored in later years because they did so. The men 
who were members of this organization estab- 
lished the People's Party, which for nearly twen- 
ty years maintained the best municipal govern- 
ment in the United States at that time. After 
they became a small minority of the voters, cor- 
ruption again obtained control. 

A national government, which refuses to inter- 
fere in a state rebellion, at the request of the 



50 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

governor, until his application has been ap- 
proved by the legislature, is a fit associate for a 
state government, the head of which sides with 
the mob, as in Illinois, and protests against the 
protection of the postal system by the federal au- 
thorities. Such are some of the beauties of our 
government. 

Sec. 23. Federalism Reviewed. — All the dis- 
graceful events, all the disorders, and all the 
dangers, described in this chapter, have their 
origin in the Divided Sovereignty of our govern- 
ment. Federation is responsible for the seces- 
sion agitation which was a great and continuous 
menace to our national existence for sixty years 
and was powerful enough to control the choice 
of a president, in nine out of twenty-two elec- 
tions. 

The weakness of our central administration 
was indirectly to blame for the frequency, the 
virulence, the prolonged maintenance and the 
extensive prevalence of strike-rebellions, openly 
favored ,; by millions of citizens who lacked the 
power but not the wish to overwhelm law and 
government for the purpose of securing their 
foolish and criminal demands. If we adhere to 
our federal feebleness, a future conjuncture of 
circumstances may enable some strike-rebellion 
to overwhelm us with a national catastrophe 
greater than any in our past history. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 51 

By leaving the highest attributes of sover- 
eignty to the states, by limiting the authority of 
its officials to foreign and interprovincial affairs 
and by thus accepting a subordinate and weak 
position, our central government has deprived it- 
self of the power to command the devout alle- 
giance of its citizens or to gain the admiration or 
respect of other countries. 

Intense prejudices separated the states at the 
close of the last century. New England, New 
York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North 
Carolina and South Carolina had differences of 
blood, law, church and industry. Fish, ships, furs, 
wheat, tobacco, timber, tar and rice were the pro- 
duction of regions that had conflicting interests. 
The descendants of the Puritans and the descend- 
ants of the Cavaliers had not lost the animosities 
that filled the heads of their ancestors; and both 
classes hated the Dutch of New York and the 
Germans of Pennsylvania as much as they hated 
each other. There was no intimate intercourse 
between the groups of colonies. They had 
neither railways nor steamboats; they had not 
consorted in the country west of the Alleghanies; 
their meetings in the revolutionary armies, in- 
stead of making friendships had in some cases, 
increased animosities. 

The ablest men of the revolutionary period 
wanted a consolidated government, and among 
them were Washington, Hamilton, Marshall, 



52 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Franklin, and John Jay. Finding that they 
could not get anything stronger than a weak fed- 
eration, they became its ardent advocates, not be- 
cause they could consider it satisfactory but l be- 
cause it was the best within reach. Hamilton 
did not conceal his disappointment; he said a 
"nation without a national government is a 
frightful spectacle." 

The record of federalism in history, considered 
as a whole is not creditable. 

The Achaean League from 281 to 146 B. 0. in 
ancient Greece had a brief existence and 
achieved no great result. 

The Swiss League from 1291 till 1900 was en- 
abled to maintain its existence by the jealousy of 
its neighbors. It did not become fully independ- 
ent of the German Empire until 1648, and since 
that year has had no foreign war of note. Its 
federalism, made excusable by the differences of 
two religions and three languages in its century, 
is much stronger than ours, and its government 
has not only foeen more harmonious but much 
purer and better in nearly every respect. 

The Dutch Kepublic from 1579 to 1795, had a 
short life and a career, brilliant on many points, 
and yet dark with many serious internal dissen- 
sions. 

The United States of America, from 1789 to 
1900, full of interprovincial discord and demands 
of separation for three quarters of a century and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 53 

full of corruption and disorder during the re- 
mainder of its existence. 

The United States of Mexico from 1825 till 
1900, with interruptions. Its nominal federal- 
ism has usually been anarchical or despotic. 

The same remark applies to the United States 
of Central America, which, however, had a brief 
existence. 

The United States of Colombia, when orderly, 
have been anarchical or despotic. 

So also the United States of Venezuela. 

So also the United States of Ecuador. 

The Argentine Kepublic has l been the most 
successful federation in Latin America. 

The United States of Brazil have had a very 
brief career. 

It is a noteworthy fact that no American au- 
thor has written an argument to prove that the 
federal system is better than a consolidated na- 
tionality; and yet if such proof could be fur- 
nished, its publication would be one of the most 
urgent duties of our statesmen, lawyers and pro- 
fessors of political philosophy. John Adams, 
Jefferson, John Quincy Adams, Kent, Story, 
Wheaton, Webster, Sumner, Calhoun, Cooley, 
Lincoln, Garfield and others, who discussed im- 
portant governmental questions with learning 
and wisdom, never selected this topic as the sub- 
ject of an essay, an oration or a book. Their 
avoidance of it is significant. The division of 



54 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

sovereignty has not been commended by the 
most eminent foreign political philosophers of 
our time, nor has it been copied from us in any 
of the European constitutions of the XlXth cen- 
tury; but it is in favor with the anarchists, col- 
lectivists and socialists. The enemies of effi- 
cient government are friends of federalism by 
instinct. 

"The English constitution," says Bagehot (289) 
"in a word, is framed on the principle of choosing 
a single sovereign authority and making it good; 
the American, upon the principle of having many 
sovereign authorities and hoping that their mul- 
titude may atone for their inferiority. The 
Americans now extol their institutions, and so 
defraud themselves of their due praise. But if 
they had not a genius for politics, if they had not 
a moderation in action singularly curious where 
superficial speech is so violent; if they had not a 
regard for law such as no great people have yet 
evinced and infinitely surpassing ours, — the mul- 
tiplicity of authorities in the American constitu- 
tion would long ago have brought it to a bad end. 
Sensible shareholders, I have heard a shrewd at- 
torney say, can work any deed of settlement; and 
so the men of Massachusetts could, I believe, 
work any constitution. 

Political liberty is a condition in which a com- 
munity is secure in the enjoyment of equal civil 
and political rights; and of such enjoyment there 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 55 

is less today in the United States, than in Great 
Britain, Belgium, Holland, Sweden, Norway, 
Denmark, Germany or France. In those coun- 
tries, crime is punished and riot suppressed 
promptly and efficiently; and a central govern- 
ment being responsible for the maintenance of 
order, order is maintained. 



56 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 



CHAPTEK II. 

CONFLICT OF DEPARTMENTS. 

Section 24. Checks. — The federal and state 
constitutions of our country have been framed 
under the influence of Montesquieu's whim, that 
the legislative, administrative and judicial de- 
partments should be kept separate, by providing 
that a person, who has authority in one, shall 
have none in another. This idea, adopted in de- 
fiance of all political experience, has proved to 
be one of the greatest blunders of our govern- 
ment. 

Among the results, of this lack of a central 
dominant and responsible power, are great con- 
fusion and inefficiency in all governmental af- 
fairs, bad management of the currency, careless 
and incompetent legislation, log-rolling and 
lo-bbying, extravagance tending to national 
bankruptcy; and a system of jurisprudence that 
is more complex, technical and expensive than 
any other in the world. 

All those European States which enjoyed 
steady prosperity, through many centuries under 
constitutional governments, gave the control of 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 57 

the administration to the legislature; and the re- 
publics and monarchies of Europe, in proportion 
as they are more or less constitutional, have 
adopted this principle, and given it prominence 
in their political systems. 

John Adams wrote an instructive account of 
the checks and balances of our federal system in 
1814, when some of the worst features of our gov- 
ernment, as it is now, had not yet been devel- 
oped, when no good account of the system of 
cabinet rule in Great Britain had been published, 
and when some of its main principles were not yet 
finally settled. He said (VI. 467) "Is not the con- 
stitution of the United States complicated with 
the idea of a balance? Is there a constitution on 
record more complicated with balances than ours? 
In the first place eighteen states and some terri- 
tories are balanced against the national govern- 
ment, whether judiciously or injudiciously, I will 
not presume at present to conjecture. We have 
seen some of the effects of it in some of the south- 
ern and middle states, under the two first admin- 
istrations [Washington and Adams] and we now 
behold some similar effects under the two last 
[Jefferson and Madison]. Some genius more 
prompt and fertile than mine may infer from a 
little what a great deal means. In the second 
place the House of Representatives is balanced 
against the Senate and the Senate against the 
House. In the third place, the executive author- 



58 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

ity is in some degree balanced against the legis- 
lature. In the fourth place, the judiciary is bal- 
anced against the House, the Senate, the Execu- 
tive and the State governments. In the fifth 
place the Senate is balanced against the Presi- 
dent in all appointments to office and in all treat- 
ties. This, in my opinion, is not merely a useless 
but a very pernicious balance. In the sixth 
place the people hold, in their own hands, the 
balance against their representatives by bien- 
nial, which I wish had been annual elections. In 
the seventh place, the legislatures of the several 
states are balanced against the Senate by sex- 
tennial elections. In the eighth place, the elec- 
tors are balanced against the people in the choice 
of President. And here is a complication and re- 
finement of balances which for anything I recol- 
lect is an invention of our own and peculiar to 
us." 

This system of checks divides and practically 
destroys responsibility, and renders proper 
official discipline impossible. From the federa- 
tion it extends into the states and cities, and 
there produces even greater confusion and evil. 
By his appointing power, the President has a 
partial control over his administrative subordi- 
nates but under the Government and Mayor the 
heads of departments owe their places to the Boss 
or the Machine, and are exempt from any control. 

In his statement, Adams omits many pernicious 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 59 

checks, including the Committee System, which 
however was not fully developed in his time, and 
including also the numerous boards which have 
independent control of important portions of ad- 
ministrative work in our states and cities. 

Sec. 25. Divided Responsibility. — Instead of de- 
fining and strengthening responsibility, as they 
should have done, if they had understood the 
lessons of political experience, our lawmakers 
have placed nearly all our officials in such posi- 
tions that they can not be held accountable or 
punished for their mistakes or malfeasances. 
The administration is independent of the legisla- 
ture not only in the federation but also in the 
states and cities; the governors are independent 
of the President; inferior executive officers are 
independent of the governors, and so also are the 
mayors, to whom many inferior executive officers 
m their respective cities owe no obedience. 

Much of the governmental work of our states 
and cities is done by boards, which are consti- 
tuted in such a manner that they are not subject 
to any proper control. Many valuable lessons of 
experience, clearly taught in European books of 
political philosophy, are unknown to American 
officials; and, even if they were known, could not 
be applied in a country where most of the places 
in the public service are given for short terms to 
unfit men, as rewards for partisan service. The 
only responsibility, felt l by such officials, is to 



60 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

their party which is always anxious to conceal 
their blunders and their crimes. 

In his Representative Government (266) John S. 
Mill says, "A most important principle of good 
government, in a popular constitution, is that no 
executive functionaries should be appointed by 
popular election, neither by the votes of the people 
themselves nor by those of their representatives. 
The entire business of government is skilled em- 
ployment; the qualifications for the discharge of 
it are of that special and professional kind which 
cannot be properly judged of except by persons 
who have themselves some share of those quali- 
fications, or some practical experience of them. 
The business of finding the fittest persons to fill 
public employments, — not merely selecting the 
best who offer, but looking out for the absolutely 
best, and taking note of all fit persons who are 
met with, that they may ! be found when wanted, 
— is very laborious, and requires a delicate as 
well as highly conscientious discernment; and as 
there is no public duty which is in general so 
badly performed, so there is none for which it is 
of greater importance to enforce the utmost 
practicable amount of personal responsibility, 
by imposing it as a special obligation on high 
functionaries in the several departments. All 
subordinate public officers who are not appointed 
by some mode of public competition should be 
selected on the direct responsibility of the minis- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? Q± 

ter under whom they serve. The ministers, all 
but the chief, will naturally be selected k by the 
chief; and the chief himself, though really desig- 
nated by Parliament, should be, in a regal gov- 
ernment, officially appointed by the crown. The 
functionary who appoints should be the sole per- 
son empowered to remove any subordinate officer 
who is liable to removal, which the far greater 
number ought not to be, except for personal mis- 
conduct, since it would be in vain to expect that 
the body of persons by whom the detail of the 
public business is transacted, and whose quali- 
fications are generally of much more importance 
to the public than those of the minister himself, 
will devote themselves to their profession, and 
acquire the knowledge and skill on which the 
minister must often place entire dependence, if 
they are liable at any moment to be turned 
adrift for no fault, that the minister may gratify 
himself, or promote his political interest by ap- 
pointing somebody else." 

Mill had much experience in the management 
of an extensive administration, — that of Hindo- 
stan under the East India Company, — and, be- 
sides, he possessed rare political learning and 
the wisdom to understand the lessons of govern- 
mental experience. His remarks, therefore, are 
entitled to much weight, when referring to the 
unfitness of a legislative body, like the American 
Congress, for meddling with minor matters of ad- 
ministration, he says (103): 



62 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

"But a popular assembly is still less fitted to 
administer, or to dictate in detail to those who 
have the charge of administration. Even when 
honestly meant, the interference is almost al- 
ways injurious. Every branch of public admin- 
istration is a skilled business, which has its own 
peculiar principles and traditional rules, many 
of them not even known in any effectual way ex- 
cept to those who have at some time had a hand 
in carrying on the business, and none of them 
likely to be duly appreciated by persons not prac- 
tically acquainted with the department. I do 
not mean that the transaction of public business 
has esoteric mysteries, only to 'be understood by 
the initiated. Its principles are all intelligible to 
any person of good sense, who has in his mind a 
true picture of the circumstances and conditions 
to be dealt with; but to have this, he must know 
those circumstances and conditions; and the 
knowledge does not come by intuition. There 
are many rules of the greatest importance in 
every branch of public business (as there are in 
every private occupation), of which a person 
fresh to the subject neither knows the reason 
nor even suspects the existence, because they 
are intended to meet dangers or provide against 
inconveniences which never entered into his 
thoughts." 

Sec. 26. The Committee System. — There are two 
methods of doing legislative work; one, called 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 63 

Responsible Government, under the control of a 
ministry which is a committee of the legislature, 
is of English origin, and is harmonious, economi- 
cal and efficient; the other, called the Committee 
System, most highly developed in the United 
States, divides the business among a number of 
independent committees who do their work dis- 
cordantly, inefficiently and extravagantly, with 
the aid of lobbying, log-rolling, and other various 
forms of corruption to 'be mentioned in this chap- 
ter and the next one. 

The Committee System was an unforeseen prod- 
uct of the federal constitution; when that docu- 
ment was framed and under consideration, be- 
fore its adoption, none of its enemies suggested 
that the independence of the administration 
would demoralize Congress, and inflict on the 
country political evils the like of which the world 
had never seen, but under which their grandsons 
and great-grandsons have suffered. 

The general results of Responsible Govern- 
ment in British experience are that the ablest 
men of the country, as a class, desire to have 
places in Parliament, that the moral standard of 
official life is high, that the Ministers are men 
of distinguished ability and long experience in 
high public place, that every important measure 
is well stated and argued on both sides in the 
House of Commons, that the policy of the nation 
is relatively steadfast, and that the management 



64 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

of the finances is economical. These results are 
the opposites, in nearly every point, to those of 
the Committee System in the United States. 
Our ablest men do not want places in Congress; 
many of the men most influential in our govern- 
ment have had little or no experience in that 
body; the most important bills are rushed 
through without public debate, our govern- 
mental policy undergoes frequent great changes, 
and the management of the finances is most ex- 
travagant. 

Under the British plan, an important bill can- 
not be passed, and a financial bill cannot be con- 
sidered, without the approval of the Cabinet 
which, because it directs legislation, as well as 
administration, is responsible to the people for 
the management of the Government. If the ma- 
jority of the House of Commons should vote 
against one important bill proposed by the 
Cabinet, the latter go out or appeal to the people, 
and if the decision be adverse, let the other side 
take charge. 

Sec. 27. Bagehot and Maine. — Bagehot thus ex- 
plains (British Constitution, 85) one of the ob- 
jections to the Committee System; "It causes 
the degradation of public life. Unless a member 
of the legislature be sure of something more than 
speech, unless he is incited by the hope of action 
and chastened by the chance of responsibility, a 
first-rate man will not care to take the place, and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 65 

will not do much if he does take it. To belong 
to a debating society adhering to an executive 
(and this is no inapt description of a congress un- 
der a presidential constitution) is not an object to 
stir a noble ambition, and is a position to en- 
courage idleness. The members of a parliament 
excluded from office can never be comparable, 
much less equal, to those of a parliament not ex- 
cluded from office. The presidential government, 
by its nature, divides political life into two 
halves, an executive half and a legislative half; 
and by so dividing it makes neither half worth a 
man's having, — worth his making it a continuous 
career, — worthy to absorb, as cabinet govern- 
ment absorbs, his whole soul. The statesmen 
from whom a nation chooses under a presidential 
system are much inferior to those from whom it 
chooses under a cabinet system, while the select- 
ing apparatus is far less discerning." 

Explaining the British constitution, Maine 
says (239) "It is in the Cabinet that the effective 
work of legislation begins. The Ministers, hard- 
ly recruited from the now very serious fatigues 
of a session which lasts all but to the commence- 
ment of September, assemble in Cabinet in No- 
vember, and in the course of a series of meetings, 
extending over rather more than a fortnight, de- 
termine what legislative proposals are to be sub- 
mitted to Parliament, These proposals sketched, 
we may believe, in not more than outline, are 



66 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

then placed in the hands of the government 
draftsman; and so much is there in all legislation 
which consists in the manipulation of detail and 
in the adaptation of vaguely conceived novelties 
to preexisting law, that we should not probably 
go far wrong, if we attributed four-fifths of every 
legislative enactment to the accomplished law- 
yer who puts into shape the government bills. 
From the measures which come from his hand, 
the tale of 'bills to be announced in the Queen's 
speech is made up and at this point English legis- 
lation enters upon another stage. . . . Every bill 
introduced into Parliament by the Ministry (and 
we have seen that all the really important bills 
are thus introduced) must be carried through the 
House of Commons without substantial altera- 
tion or the ministers will resign and conse- 
quences of the gravest kind may follow in the 
remotest part of an empire extending to the ends 
of the earth. Thus a government has to be 
forced through the House of Commons with the 
whole strength of party organization and in a 
shape very closely resembling that which the 
Executive Government gave it. . . . It is there- 
fore the Executive Government which should be 
credited with the authorship of the English legis- 
lation." 

To this may be added that at this cabinet meet- 
ing every secretary states the urgent needs of his 
department, and is prepared to go into detail if 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 67 

questioned by his associates. In many cases his 
bills drawn by his subordinates or under their 
direction are ready to be submitted to the stat- 
ute-drafting lawyer, whose duties are to revise 
the phraseology and to see that the provisions of 
the '-bill do not conflict with previous legislation. 

Sec. 28. Schuyler. — In his book on American 
Diplomacy, (3) Eugene Schuyler thus explains the 
distribution of political power in Washington 
when there was only one Appropriation Com- 
mittee in the House of Representatives. "The 
government of the United States, in ordinary 
peaceful and uneventful times, is a nearly irre- 
sponsible despotism, composed of five or six men, 
working under and through constitutional forms, 
and subject only to the penalty which is always 
attached to very grave mistakes. These six men 
are the President of the United States, who is, 
it is true, elected by the people, but only from 
two or three candidates proposed by partisan 
conventions as the result of intrigue or of the fail- 
ure of intrigue; the Secretary of State and the 
Secretary of the Treasury, named by the Presi- 
dent as his colleagues and associates, rather than 
his advisers and servants, confirmed by the Sen- 
ate which never refuses its approval except for 
cause of the most scandalous nature or for rea- 
sons of extreme partisan feeling; the Speaker of 
the House of Representatives who is elected as 
such by his fellow-congressmen at the dictation 



68 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

of a clique or as the result of a compromise be- 
tween the factions and the personal ambitions 
of the dominant party; the Chairman of the 
Standing Committee on Appropriations and the 
Chairman of the Standing Committee on Ways 
and Means in the House of Representatives, both 
appointed by the Speaker, leading men in Com 
gress and generally his rivals for the speaker- 
ship." Since that statement was written the 
number of the ruling clique has been increased 
by the multiplication of chairmen of appropria- 
tion committees. 

Sec. 29. Log-Roiling. — Log-rolling is an insti- 
tution peculiarly adapted to the intelligence and 
morals of the average American legislator. It 
gives him a sphere of activity which he can soon 
learn, and which enables him to go back to his 
constituents with tangible results of his influ- 
ence. He and his associates divide the Union or 
the State into districts and distribute a large 
portion of the public revenue among them by 
giving to one a public building, and to others other 
things. In this method Congress distributes fed- 
eral buildings, navy yards, fortifications, and im- 
provements in rivers and harbors. There is also 
a log-rolling of occupations; the silver miners, 
iron smelters, coal miners, cotton spinners, wool 
growers and lumbermen combine to restrict com- 
petition and to compel the general public to pay 
a higher price for their products. In every 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 69 

branch of American legislation, the predominant 
influence is regard not for the general interest 
but those particular interests which have ob- 
tained a majority of votes by log-rolling. 

"For the last ten or fifteen years" wrote 
Thaddeus Stevens in 1867, "the legislature of 
Pennsylvania [of which state he was then a Kep- 
resentative in Congress] has had a most unenvi- 
able reputation. Corruption, bribery and fraud 
have been freely charged and I fear, too often 
proved, to have controlled their actions. No mat- 
ter how honest when chosen, the atmosphere of 
Harrisburg seems to have pierced many of them 
with a demoralizing taint. A seat in the Legis- 
lature became an object of ambition, not for the 
per diem, [the salary] but for the chance of levy- 
ing contributions from rich corporations and 
other large jobs. Corruption finally became so 
respectable as to seduce candidates for office 
boldly, to bid for them, and to pay the cash for 
the delivery of the ballot. The very office of 
[federal] senator is known to have been once 
bought for gold." 

Sec. 30. <Lobhy. — The legislation of an Ameri- 
can city is usually, and that of a State, sometimes 
controlled by a Boss, but when he does not pos- 
sess or exercise a dominating influence, the Lobby 
may assume direction. The Lobby is a man or 
set of men, usually working for hire, to secure 
the adoption or defeat of bills. The Lobbyist 



70 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

takes charge of work which the Boss does not 
direct. He studies the character, career, ambi- 
tion, pecuniary condition, habits, weaknesses, 
vices, associates and pet measures of the mem- 
bers whom he supposes manageable and, as most 
of them are men without high character or 
capacity, he usually finds little difficulty in mak- 
ing himself useful to them and making them use- 
ful to himself. He buys them as cheaply as he 
can, and often manages Log-rolling schemes, so 
that he gets their votes without money payment. 
Referring to the desirability of introducing re- 
sponsible government, Gamaliel Brandford says 
(II. 409) that a the opposition hardest to be over- 
come is that of the Lobby. We have pointed out 
the immense power which private interests have 
acquired and are more and more acquiring in a 
legislative body, disorganized, without leaders, 
composed of equal units and working by stand- 
ing committees, whether elected or appointed by 
the presiding officer; a body in which majorities 
must be made up by an accumulation of votes 
one by one, worked up by log-rolling, trading, 
and all sorts of motives, in practical secrecy, 
without personal responsibility and with very 
little reference to the administrative effect upon 
the country. As party success has come to de- 
pend largely upon operations of this kind, so, on 
the other hand, the private interest, having in- 
trenched themselves behind the parties in Con- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 71 

gress, will be in deadly hostility to any move- 
ment which threatens to .introduce public and 
personal responsibility among members and by 
public debate and discussion to let in a flood of 
light upon methods of legislation." 

The Lobbyist dislikes the discussion of bills 
which he advocates or opposes, and discussion is 
becoming rare in our legislative bodies. He 
wants to arrange business in private conversa- 
tion, and to avoid appeals to public opinion. He 
makes his living by secret methods, and hates all 
others. Prof. Hyslop (12) complains that though 
our legislatures "were intended primarily to be 
deliberative assemblies where debate is supposed 
to be free and rational, and where voting can be 
reached after a reasonable amount of time has 
been allowed for deliberation and discussion," 
yet that most of them "are either constituted or 
controlled by men who either cannot or dare not 
discuss the measures proposed by them. They 
maintain silence against all reason and vote sub- 
missively in obedience to a boss, or they open 
their mouths only to obstruct legislation and to 
make a strike." 

Sec. 31. Private Bills, — One notable result of 
our defective political system is the vast multi- 
tude of private and local bills which have no par- 
allels in the British Parliament and should not 
be permitted in our country. ,Some of the state 
constitutions have greatly restricted them with 



72 REFORM OR RESOLUTION? 

very beneficial results; but the restrictions have 
not been entirely successful because now gener- 
al bills are more frequently passed for special 
and private purposes. In Congress and many of 
the states however there is no limitation. 

When taking leave of the House of Kepresen- 
tatives on the 4th of March 1885, Speaker J. G. 
Carlisle said: "It is evident that unless some 
constitutional or legal provision can l be adopted 
which will relieve Congress from the considera- 
tion of all or at least a large part of the local and 
private measures which now occupy the time of 
the committees and fill the calendars of the two 
houses, the percentage of business left undispos- 
ed of at each adjournment must continue to in- 
crease." G. F. Edmunds, Acting President of 
the Senate delivered a parting address to that 
body on the same day and said, "It is . . . an 
evil of large and growing proportions that meas- 
ures of the greatest importance, requiring much 
time for proper examination and discussion in 
detail, are brought to our consideration so late 
that it is not possible to deal with them intelli- 
gently and which we are tempted (over tempted 
I fear) to enact into laws in the hope that fortune 
rather than time, study and reflection will take 
care that the republic suffer no detriment." 

The terms being brief, the pay small in relation 
to the large expenses of the canvass and election, 
the work uninstructive and in many respects of- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 73 

fensive, men of high character and capacity rare- 
ly seek the legislative career. The inferior men 
who obtain it for a brief season, do not get their 
bills in shape nntil the close of the session, and 
then do most of their work in the last week or 
even in the last day, and in many cases, hold 
back their bills purposely to rush them through 
when there is no time for examination or opposi- 
tion. 1 

The ministry in Great Britain and various oth- 
er European countries, being responsible to pub- 
lic opinion for every important legislative meas- 
ure, is extremely careful that its bills shall be 
drawn by learned and able men and by them 
made to harmonize with all antecedent legisla- 
tion. There is no such responsibility and there- 
fore no such care in the national and state legis- 
lation of our country, and consequently our 
courts frequently have to deal with the litigation 
arising out of conflicting and vague statutes. 

Hoist (IV. 218) thus characterizes the common 
procedure of the managers of congressional busi- 
ness; "Their unscrupulous selfishness, their ar- 
dent race for the spoils, their habit of bargaining 
in great things and small, their intellectual and 
moral stagnation of party spirit, destitute of 
thought and principle alike, their faith in the om- 
nipotence of their petty, professional tricks and 
artifice, invested in impenetrable mist what in it- 
self was so terribly clear." 



74 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Joseph H. Crooker (Problems in American Socie- 
ty, 187) says "Is it not a fact that we have come 
to dread sessions of Congress and of Legislatures 
as carnivals of selfishness, while we feel relieved 
when the day of final adjournment arrives? That 
we anticipate a political campaign with dread 
and disgust, as a scourge of slander and unrea- 
son? That official position, instead of conferring 
honor, raises in the public mind the suspicion of 
the occupant's integrity, political life having 
come to be looked upon a? so much baser than 
other callings? That youn^ men almost every- 
where take it for granted, in their discussion of 
the merits of different vocations, that political 
success can only be won by the tricks of the dem- 
agogue? That we are glad to have people know 
as little as possible of the actual methods by 
which laws are made, so shameful is the process 
that, were the inside history of legislation gener- 
ally known, public respect for our statutes would 
be destroyed? That political newspapers are not 
expected by the masses to tell the truth? Now, 
is not this a lamentable state of affairs, — a state 
of popular opinion which argues ill for the fu- 
ture of America, even if so extreme an opinion is 
not warranted by the actual facts?" 

Sec. 32. Slip-Shod Laws. — The law-making of 
the country is done without proper knowledge, 
care or integrity in the federal, state or munici- 
pal councils. Membership in these bodies is giv- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 75 

en to persons not properly qualified for their 
work. Nine out of ten cannot draft a bill or un- 
derstand its force when they read it. The term 
of members in the federal House of Representa- 
tives lasts only two years each of which has 
about one hundred working days of the session; 
and as the majority are new to the business, they 
do not become masters of the routine methods, 
leaving the higher principles of legislation out of 
consideration. The work is uninstructive, its 
aims low, its methods careless. The first point 
of ambition with the majority is to get public 
buildings, river or harbor improvements, milita- 
ry posts or the expenditure of federal moneys in 
some form for their respective districts, and se- 
cure kinds of taxation advantageous to their con- 
stituents. The second point is to show that, if 
they did not succeed, they at least made a good 
fight to obtain more than a fair share of the pub- 
lic plunder. 

Most of the bills are special in character even 
when the title and initial section are general in 
form. They are drawn with limitations which re- 
strict their operation, and enable their advocates 
to say when objection is made to them, ''these 
bills apply only to Buncombe county and there- 
fore do not concern you; if you defeat our bills, 
we will defeat yours." The same principle of 
special legislation, the same custom of letting 
the representatives of every district have their 



76 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

own way in regard to local affairs, and of divid- 
ing up important general questions into territor- 
ial divisions, prevail in state as well as federal 
legislation. The country suffers with a flux of 
bills. The average annual number is more proba- 
bly at least 20,000; and two hundred, — as many 
as the British Parliament enacts for an empire 
with 350,000,000 inhabitants,— would be suffi- 
cient. 

In a message to the legislature of New York in 
1885, Governor Hill (quoted by Simon Sterne in 
his Questions of the Day, 105) complained "that 
one of the greatest evils incident to the hasty 
methods of modern [American] legislation is the 
careless and imperfect manner in which bills are 
generally passed. Much needed legislation is 
annually lost because of the large number of 
measures which are left in the hands of the 
executive at the adjournment of the legislature 
which are so defective that they cannot pos- 
sibly be approved. . . . The record shows that 
during the legislative session of 1883, some forty- 
five bills were recalled from the executive 
chamber after their final passage for neces- 
sary * amendments and corrections, while dur- 
ing the last session of 1884 there were some fifty 
of such instances." Such blunders are doubtless 
as numerous in most of the other states as in New 
York; and the errors of form are much less se- 
rious than mistakes in substance. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 77 

Our municipal system is a national disgrace. 
It is a wonderfully complex product of ignorance 
and folly. One relatively brief parliamentary 
statute is the charter of nearly all the English 
cities; a single sentence, in a national law au- 
thorizing them to manage their municipal affairs, 
is the charter of the French cities; and the Prus- 
sian law, conferring corporate power, on cities is 
brief. There, the national government seldom in- 
terferes in municipal affairs; and the city officials 
are experienced, capable and honest. 

Here things are managed differently. In most 
of our states, every city must have its special 
charter, peculiar in phraseology and ideas, in 
many cases an elaborate document, ten times as 
long as our federal constitution, complicated by 
numerous legislative amendments, and requiring 
hundreds of judicial decisions of the State Su- 
preme Court to interpret its vague, conflicting 
and complex provisions. In many cases, the leg- 
islature has and exercises the power to change 
the charter, notwithstanding the protest of the 
city officials, to order that certain municipal work 
shall or shall not be done, that certain foills shall 
or shall not be paid, that certain persons shall 
or shall not have municipal offices, and that new 
elections shall or shall not be held. In the num- 
ber, variety and extravagance of our municipal 
blunders, we beat all the other nations of the 
earth. 



78 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 33. Discordant Laws. — Instead of having 
a comprehensive and harmonious government, 
uniform in all its geographical divisions, the 
country has more than two scores of petty leg- 
islative, administrative and judicial systems, each 
of which has its independent and in many cases 
discordant laws regulating civil and criminal 
affairs. The citizen may find that by crossing 
a river within the limits of the United States, 
he has passed beyond the dominion of the legisla- 
tion with which he was familiar, and has reached 
a region where conveyances, wills, promissory 
notes, marriages and divorces made according to 
the forms authorized in his native state have no 
validity. The confusion and litigation resulting 
from this diversity of laws are serious evils but 
are small as compared with the great expense of 
maintaining forty-five unnecessary sets of govern- 
mental officers. 

Though not worse in principle than many oth- 
er discrepancies of American legislation, there 
is something peculiarly offensive in the laws re- 
lating to matrimony and divorce. A man may at 
the same time have half a dozen lawful wives or 
even more, from whom he has no divorce lawful 
in the state in which each of them resides, in 
which he established his residence with each of 
them and from which he never took them or de- 
manded that they should move. By leaving them 
without notice of his intentions to desert them fi- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 79 

nally, and to obtain a divorce he may obtain one 
without giving actual notice of his suit and with- 
out staying more than a week within the limits 
of the state which grants his secret application 
to be released from the bonds of matrimony. The 
law requires that notice shall be given to per- 
sons out of the state 'by publication in a news- 
paper, but as this newspaper is not seen by the 
defendant, the proceeding is, in many cases, prac- 
tically secret and he or she may remain ignorant 
for years that the divorce has been granted. The 
law in many states makes incompatibility of tem- 
per a sufficient cause for action, and when the 
bond becomes irksome to either party, the tem- 
pers are incompatible. Those who are legal 
spouses to each other in the morning may be the 
legal spouses of others in the afternoon of the 
same day. Journalistic exaggeration says rail- 
way trains stop an hour at some stations in In- 
diana to allow passengers to get divorces, and 
that a gentleman claimed relationship with a lady 
in Chicago because her fourth husband had mar- 
ried his second wife. 

Sec. 34. Federal Senate. — The municipal coun- 
cil, the state legislature and the federal senate 
compete for the distinction of having reached the 
highest eminence among the political bodies of 
the United States in official corruption. Much 
may be said for each claim but I am disposed to 
award the prize to the Senate, because, not of the 



80 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

greater baseness of most of its members, 'but of 
its superior prominence and dignity which give 
more influence to the numerous great abuses it 
practices and sustains. 

Some of the federal senators have served in the 
legislature or lower House of Congress, and by 
the aid of experience and tact, have become state 
bosses, with influence enough to secure their ad- 
vancement to the highest legislative office in the 
country. Their chief duties are to secure appro- 
priations and other governmental favors for 
their constituents; not to legislate for the gener- 
al good nor to plead for the rights of humanity. 
The time has passed when a Webster or a Sumner 
could get an attentive hearing in the Senate of 
the United States. Instead of giving his chief 
attention now to national or international affairs 
the favorite son of the State must secure the ex- 
penditure of a large amount of federal money 
among his constituents or must see to it that 
their products are protected against competition 
by an excessive duty on imports. 

The candidate, who has a high position among 
senators and can secure great favors for his 
state, is almost sure of re-election; but when, as 
often happens, no one of the aspirants has supe- 
rior claims, then the man with money sees his 
chance to capture the prize. Before the time has 
come for nominating legislative candidates, he 
visits or sends an agent to visit all or most of the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 81 

counties of his state; sees the members of the 
County Committees, and the men who want to go 
to the legislature; finds popular candidates who 
are willing to vote for him for Senator; offers 
to pay their campaign expenses; and contributes 
liberally to the campaign fund of the county. In 
this way he secures a majority of the members of 
his party in the legislature, and if they have con- 
trol, he is sure of going to the senate. He has 
given money freely and perhaps lavishly for 
campaign expenses; he has not exacted a strict 
account of the method of expenditure; he can 
say that he has not given a bribe to anybody, and 
yet if he had not spent a large amount of money, 
he could not have been elected. So many rich 
men have reached the senate within the last 
thirty years that it has been called with some 
exaggeration, "a club of millionaires." Most of 
its present members were politically corrupt be- 
fore they were elected and they use their power 
in methods which disgrace the government. 

During the first half century, the senate was a 
relatively honest and scrupulous body but it has 
now acquired other characteristics. It makes a 
practice of -blocking business, "holding up" the 
other house and compelling it to deliver public 
plunder. Cannon, Chairman of the Appropria- 
tion Committee in the House of Kepresentatives 
said in the Fifty-Fourth Congress on the 9th of 
March, 1897: "The General Deficiency bill in 



82 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

recent sessions, as it leaves the House, providing 
for several deficiencies in current appropriations 
for the support of the government, is a mere 
vehicle wherein the Senate loads up and carries 
through every sort of claims that should have no 
consideration in either branch of Congress except 
as independent bills reported from competent com- 
mittees." 

All the appropriation bills have their origin 
and are carefully studied in the House of Repre- 
sentatives, but the Senate has adopted the prac- 
tice of refusing to pass them without amend- 
ments drawn for purposes of personal or local 
favoritism. This custom is called "the Sena- 
torial hold-up"; suggested by the highwayman's 
cry of "hold up your hands." The financial pol- 
icy of the House is bad and that of the Senate is 
worse; the former is positive and the latter super- 
lative in its greed for plunder. 

In 1894 Senator Vest, as quoted by Ford (Rise 
and Growth of American Politics, 270), declared 
that "after my experience in the last five months, 
I have not an enemy in the world whom I would 
place in the position that I have occupied as a 
member of the Finance Committee under the 
rules of the Senate. I would put no man where 
I have been to be blackmailed and driven in 
order to pass a bill that I believe is necessary to 
the welfare of the country, by senators who de- 
sired to force amendments upon me against my 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 83 

'better judgment and compel me to decide the 
question whether I will take any bill at all or a 
bill which has been distorted by their views and 
objects." 

"Senators take care" says H. J. Ford (319) "to 
load bills with matter for use in making mock 
concessions, while they extort, from the House, 
everything they really want. This arbitrary 
control of Senators over legislation was the issue 
really involved in the conflict between the two 
Houses over the tariff bill of 1894. Fear, lest the 
bill might be defeated altogether, caused the 
House suddenly to pass the bill just as it came 
back from the Senate. This unprecedented ac- 
tion made a chance exposure of the way in which 
legislation is really shaped. Some senators 
found themselves badly caught at their own tricks, 
provisions, which they introduced with a jockey- 
ing purpose, 'being converted into law. Senator 
Sherman complained that 'there are many cases 
in the bill where the enactment was not intended 
by the Senate. For instance, innumerable 
amendments were put on by senators on both 
sides of the chamber ... to give the Committee 
of Conference a chance to think of the matter 
and they are all adopted, whatever may be their 
language or the incongruity with other parts of 
the bill.' " 

Sec. 35. Finances. — The Committee System has a 
bad influence on every branch of legislative work 



84 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

but especially on the management of the finances. 
The federal House of Kepresentatives has about 
fifty committees, each independent of the others, 
and each interested in carrying its own bills with- 
out much regard for other business. Any one of 
many may recommend large appropriations, — 
there are eight "appropriation committees," — and 
there is no harmonizing supervision. Nor is there 
any provision in the constitution forbidding the 
attachment of most incongruous provisions or 
riders to measures necessary for the collection of 
revenue or the payment of the army. The rider 
is especially odious when mounted on some in- 
dispensable measure which has been delayed, 
carelessly or purposely, till the last days of the 
session, and then changed in one house so that it 
must be entrusted to a joint or conference com- 
mittee representing both houses. Such a com- 
mittee has exceptional and despotic power, and 
two Senators or two Kepresentatives out of three 
can say "pass the bill as we have doctored it or 
assume the responsibility of seriously injuring 
the business of the country or the interests of 
your party." The doctoring which they have in- 
troduced may include ideas of which neither 
house had the least thought when the bill was re- 
ferred. 

The federal treasury is rushing towards bank- 
ruptcy. Its expenditure is increasing seven per 
cent annually, more than twice as fast as the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 85 

national wealth, and three times as fast as the 
population. This pace has been kept up for thirty 
years and has a most grave significance to any 
one who understands the main principles of 
finance. We must stop soon or break. There is 
a great peril in even a brief continuance of our 
present gait. 

In a luminous address to the House of Eepre- 
sentatives, James A. Garfield, in January, 1872, 
stated that the federal expenditures of the pre- 
vious fiscal year, exclusive of payments on the 
public debt, amounted to $166,000,000. In the 
fiscal year of 1896-97, more than a quarter of ?l 
century later, the same classes of expenditure (as 
reported in the Annual American Cyclopedia) 
amounted to $763,000,000. The increase is 
nearly seven per cent compounding annually. 
The movement in the expenditures of states and 
cities in the same period was very irregular, but 
showed an average increase perhaps as large. 

The spirit in which Congress draws up its 
revenue bills is suggested by a remark of Senator 
Allen (Congressional Record, June 29th, 1897) 
that "The consumers seem largely to get the 
worst of it in the framing of a tariff bill. That 
is true partly because they have nobody here 
looking after their interests particularly. They 
are not organized." This implies a fact which 
we know from other sources that the national 
legislature is guided in such matters much more 



86 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

by regard for private than for public interests; 
and that the classes not represented in the lobby 
are not well protected in the laws. 

There are eight different appropriation Com- 
mittees in the House of Representatives where 
most of the congressional work of expenditure is 
managed, and each of these committees acts in- 
dependently and most of them are under the in- 
fluence of partisan, personal and local interests 
and not of national policy. The system is one not 
found in any other enlightened nation, and not ap- 
proved by any great authority on finance. Prof. 
Woodrow Wilson predicts (Congressional Govern- 
ment, 191) that under it, "the finances will go 
from bad to worse." In 1885 when the appro- 
priation work was divided up among numerous 
committees, Mr. Randall, an able Congressman 
warned his associates that they were starting on 
a career of accelerating extravagance which 
threatened to bankrupt the treasury. Expe- 
rience has justified his warning. There has been 
an increase of f 50,000,000 annually of expendi- 
ture beyond the relative increase of population; 
and the wastefulness and the accompanying de- 
moralization in Congress increase with every ad- 
ministration. 

A fundamental defect of our national finances 
is that they are not managed by the cabinet; they 
are not even controlled by one legislative com- 
mittee, but demoralized by the conflicting pur- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 87 

poses of eight different appropriation committees, 
in the House of representatives and then are 
further thrown into disorder by a corrupt and 
reckless Senate. Moffett (68) says truly that 
"The unity of the budget is a principle so essen- 
tial to anything like scientific, or even decent, 
finance that nothing but inexhaustible wealth 
has enabled this country to get along without it. 
Our national financial system appears deliber- 
ately designed for the encouragement of extrava- 
gance. The taxes are fixed for an indefinite 
period, and the rates are based to a great extent 
on considerations independent of the needs of the 
Government." 

The national revenue system is hampered and 
degraded by the clause providing that every 
direct tax imposed by Congress must be levied on 
the states in proportion to their population. 
This restriction indirectly exempts property both 
real and personal, and also incomes, from the 
jurisdiction of the national treasury, which is 
thus compelled to obtain its funds from burdens 
levied not on the wealth but on the consumption 
and largely on the labor of the country. 

Because of its defective financial system, the 
greater number of its officials, their higher sal- 
aries, their usual inexperience and inefficiency, 
their inferior discipline and their dishonesty in 
many cases, the American government is the most 
expensive in the world. According to calculations 



88 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

made by political statisticians, it pays five times as 
much for the same amount of work in some impor- 
tant departments as does the British government. 
Several years '-before his election to the presi- 
dency, Garfield declared in Congress, that the 
clerks, laborers and messengers in the federal 
service in Washington received twice as much as 
was paid for similar service by private citizens; 
and he implied that the work was not so well 
done. He quoted and accredited the words to 
Hugh McCulloch, Secretary of the treasury 
under Grant, "If you will give me one-half what 
it costs to run the treasury department of the 
United States I will do all its work better than it 
is done and make a great fortune out of what I can 
save." 

A remarkable feature in the management of 
the federal finances is the payment of $2,000,000,- 
000, of military and naval pensions in the twenty- 
five years ending with June, 1899. The main 
motives for this most extravagant expenditure 
were not to clear off the debt and properly re- 
ward the soldiers and sailors who saved the 
Union, but to buy the votes of the pensioners and 
of those people who derived a profit from a high 
protective tariff. If the money had been used to 
extinguish the national debt, there would have 
been no excuse for a high tariff, which last the 
Lobby wanted, and therefore it also wanted an 
extravagant pension list. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 89 

Partly because of the lack of harmonious and 
responsible financial management, many of the 
states have repudiated detots amounting in the 
aggregate to about $180,000,000 and some of 
these states were, at the time, abundantly able 
to pay, and in this class were Pennsylvania, 
Michigan and Minnesota. Those Southern states 
which had been plundered by the carpet-baggers 
had better excuses for their pecuniary delin- 
quencies, which nevertheless were most disgrace- 
ful to the nation. 

Sec. 36. Presidential Impeachment. — The govern- 
ment of the United States was subjected to a 
very serious strain in 1867, when Congress, hav- 
ing quarreled with the President about the 
method of restoring the Southern States to their 
share in the federal government, attempted to 
expel him from office by the process of impeach- 
ment. In reference to this affair Bagehot 
(English Constitution, 52) says "The quarrel, in 
most countries, would have gone beyond the law 
and come to blows; even in America, the most 
law-loving of countries, it went as far as possible 
within the law. Mr. Johnson described the most 
popular branch of the legislature, — the House of 
Representatives, — as a body 'hanging on the 
verge of the government'; and that House im- 
peached him criminally, in the hope that, in that 
way, they might get rid of him civilly. Nothing 
could be so conclusive against the American con- 



90 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

stitution, as a constitution, as that incident. A 
hostile legislature and a hostile executive were 
so tied together, that the legislature tried and 
tried in vain, to rid itself of the executive by ac- 
cusing it of illegal practices. The legislature 
was so afraid of the President's legal power that 
it unfairly accused him of acting beyond the 
law." 

Sec. 37. Nullifying Courts. — With forty-six con- 
flicting constitutions, and forty-six conflicting 
legislatures, and five hundred elaborate munici- 
pal charters, each differing from all the others, 
and 7,000 new statutes adopted annually in haste 
by men, many of whom are grossly ignorant or 
dishonest, — with all these features in our gov- 
ernment, we need a political balance wheel dif- 
ferent from any found in other governments. 
Fortunately we have it in our system of courts 
clothed with authority to nullify statutes, and 
ordinances by declaring them unconstitutional. 
Even a Justice of the Peace may declare a 
federal law to be unconstitutional. Such a judi- 
cial power would be an intolerable evil in a 
well-organized state; here it is a 'blessing. 

Sec. 38. Military Discord. — Our military sys- 
tem is disgracefully weak and discordant. Our 
land troops are divided into two classes, the regu- 
lars or national army and the militia or state 
armies, each state having its independent mili- 
tary organization. The federal constitution pro- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 91 

vides that Congress shall have power "to provide 
for calling forth the militia to execute the laws 
of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel 
invasions"; and also "to provide for organizing, 
arming and disciplining the militia, and for gov- 
erning such part of them as may be employed in 
the service of the United States, reserving to the 
States respectively the appointment of the offi- 
cers, and the authority of training the militia, ac- 
cording to the discipline prescribed by Con- 
gress." It also provides that the United States 
shall protect each of the States "against inva- 
sion; and on application of the legislature, or of 
the Executive (when the legislature cannot be 
convened against domestic violence." 

These provisions assume that there is a militia 
or military force in each of the states; that this 
force is, under ordinary circumstances, to be 
paid, enlisted, and uniformed by the State, under 
a State oath of allegiance and under a State flag, 
if the State see fit to so order. The appoint- 
ment of the officers and the training of the State 
are irreconcilable with uniformity of discipline 
or strength of national feeling. 

A statute of 1795 and another of 1861 provide 
that the President shall have authority to call 
out the militia whenever he considers it nec- 
essary and the Federal Supreme Court has de- 
cided that he has exclusive authority to deter- 
mine that necessity; but so long as the governors 



92 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

are not under his control and may refuse to obey 
his orders, as they did in 1812 and in the war of 
1861, without exposing themselves to the least 
danger of punishment, the President's control 
over the militia is extremely uncertain. In 1863 
General John A. Dix, fearing that Governor Sey- 
mour of New York would call out the state 
militia to resist the orders of the President of the 
United States, suggested that an order calling 
out the militia of that state should be sent not to 
the Governor but to his subordinate, General 
Sandford (Memoirs of J. A. Dix II. 342). Dix 
was an able man, learned in the law, and his sug- 
gestion, a proper one under the circumstances, 
made by him in his position of commanding gen- 
eral in New York city, implies a great defect in 
our military system. In providing that the offi- 
cers of the militia shall 'be appointed by the 
State, the Federal Constitution implies that they 
shall be subject to the orders of the Governor 
who is their local head. 

The militia is not only to a large extent inde- 
pendent of, but is also by certain conditions of its 
organization, hostile to the regular army. When 
called out for war, its officers are appointed by 
the governors under the Spoils System; and they 
are not only ignorant of military affairs but, as a 
class, they have no strong motives to learn their 
duties, to enforce discipline or to protect the gov- 
ernment against gross frauds in contracts for 
transportation and supplies. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 93 

The state troops and their officers possess great 
political influence and therefore, on many im- 
portant occasions, take precedence of the regular 
army when laurels are to be gained or honors en- 
joyed, and they are shielded against exposure and 
punishment for their blunders, their cowardice, 
and their frauds. The political "pull" hampers 
and paralyzes the highest integrity and courage 
in the Presidency, in the Cabinet and in Congress. 

Sec. 39. Conflict Review, — In this chapter, we 
have seen that our government is full of conflict- 
ing bothers between departments and offices, and 
that there is a complete lack of that harmony nec- 
essary to national credit and governmental 
economy and efficiency. We have no proper 
gradation of authority, and therefore many of our 
place-holders are insubordinate and are respon- 
sible to no superior except a corrupt political or- 
ganization. Abuses fill all the branches of the 
public service and are so hidden by a pernicious 
system that, in most cases, the fault cannot be 
traced to the evildoer. Nobody is to blame. Our 
Independent Administration, our Committee Sys- 
tem, our Lobby, our Log-rolling, our Independent 
Governors, and our Independent State Armies are 
unknown in other enlightened countries and are 
disgraceful to our intelligence. 



94 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 



CHAPTER III. 

THE SPOILS. 

Section 40. The Party. — Our third political evil 
is the Spoils System with its boss, journalistic 
organ, brevity and rotation of official terms 
popular election of administrative and judicial 
officers, numerous candidates (sometimes fifty) on 
one ballot, and the treatment of the public service 
as pay for partisan service. These detestable fea- 
tures of our government are without parallels in 
most other enlightened countries. 

By its control over leading newspapers, political 
organizations, officials and aspirants for office, the 
Party System is enabled to fill the ignorant multi- 
tude with narrow prejudices and unsound ideas. 
It magnifies petty and minimizes large govern- 
mental questions. It asserts what is false and de- 
nies what is true. It exaggerates the importance 
of many minor points of financial policy. It fos- 
ters and strengthens local prejudices. It makes 
up a long platform with many vague, incoherent, 
insincere and fraudulent promises each devised 
to catch the support of some class of votes; and 
ail when considered together, furnishing conclu- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 95 

sive proof of the gross unfitness of the men, who 
framed the document, to be trusted with the man- 
agement of a government. It enforces rotation 
and the Spoils System, thus rendering it impos- 
sible for the state to get men of experience and 
competency in most of the offices. It stultifies 
the people and debases the public service. 

Exclusive of the military and naval depart- 
ments, our country has about 180,000 federal offi- 
ces of which 80,000 are held for terms of four 
years, and at the beginning of every presidential 
term, each of them is solicited by five aspirants on 
an average, making 400,000 federal office seekers. 
In the diplomatic and consular service there are 
fifty applicants for each place. The state, county, 
city and town offices with pay or possible pick- 
ings number 500,000, and become vacant once in 
three years on an average. For each of these 
offices there may be five aspirants, making a grand 
total of 2,900,000 office-seekers, or nearly one in 
HYe of all the voters, who must attach themselves 
to some leader with influence that may secure a 
nomination or appointment. Thus, a large pro- 
portion of the population are enchained to the 
partisan organization, and are bribed to exag- 
gerate the importance of the ostensible principles 
involved in the partisan conflicts. These facts go 
far to explain the unparalleled excitement of the 
presidential campaigns which touch the pockets 
of a large proportion of the people. 



96 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

The recipient of an office knows the persons to 
whom he is indebted and accepts it with an im- 
plied if not an express promise that he will re- 
ciprocate by a contribution to the party fund, by 
a percentage of his salary, by giving the appoint- 
ments of his subordinates, by awarding contracts, 
by making purchases, or by other official favors 
at the expense of the public. He who refuses to 
render compensation is denounced, persecuted and 
excluded from later favors. 

The demoralization of the public service is the 
result not of any enfeeblement of the conscience 
that necessarily follows the establishment of 
Democratic government or induction into office, 
but is caused by the system which selects incom- 
petent men for office, gives them no inducement 
to perform its duties properly, and if they steal, 
protects them as far as possible against exposure 
and punishment. European writers upon politi- 
cal philosophy are right in asserting that our offi- 
cial system (including short terms, rotation in 
office, nominations given as rewards for partisan 
service, and all the circumstances that accompany 
the adoption of the rule that the public offices are 
spoils to be divided among the victors in the elec- 
tions) necessarily leads to corruption. No such 
malfeasance in office is known in any other civi- 
lized country, and no other country treats all the 
public offices as partisan spoils. In Great Britain, 
the self-governing British Colonies, France, Ger- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 97 

many, Italy, Switzerland, Holland, Belgium, Den- 
mark, Sweden, Norway, and Spain, nearly all the 
servants of the government hold their offices dur- 
ing good behavior. They must learn their busi- 
ness; they do not owe their promotion to partisan 
influence, and if they prove incompetent or dis- 
honest, there is no partisan influence to protect 
them. They work for small salaries, because 
their office is a life-long business, and an honor of 
which Americans have no example and scarcely a 
conception. 

"What was intended" says Stickney in his 
Democratic Government, "to be a free democratic 
government has grown to be a tyranny, — a 
tyranny of a new kind, — a tyranny, not of men, 
but of a system. Our rulers have no wish or pur- 
pose to enslave the people. They would, if it 
were in their power, serve the people faithfully, 
to the best of their abilities. But no man in this 
country now has anything that deserves the name 
of full political freedom. The magnitude of the 
election work made necessary by our present sys- 
tem of government, with the lack of the natural 
organ for the thought and action of the people, 
has brought into existence great and powerful 
organizations, which so fetter the action of the 
citizen, of the people, and of all our public ser- 
vants, that an honest, efficient administration of 
public affairs is an impossible thing. The whole 
body politic is in chains. Citizens can do nothing 



98 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

but cast a ballot prepared for them by some great 
and powerful election organization. The people 
cannot freely form and utter its own judgment or 
will, on either men or measures. Public servants 
are compelled to use their public powers to serve 
the personal ends of the great election organiza- 
tions. Those organizations control nominations, 
and thereby substantially appoint and largely con- 
trol all of our highest public servants. The men 
who hold the highest public places, on whom we 
must necessarily depend for the efficient adminis- 
tration of all public affairs, are not free men. 
They are engaged in a perpetual struggle for polit- 
ical existence, and, to a greater or less extent 
serve the powers on whom they depend for a con- 
tinuance of their political lives. So long as our 
present system of government continues, we can 
expect no permanent improvement in the admin- 
istration of our public affairs." 

The same author in A True Republic (151) com- 
plains that "The thing that we call party is the 
poison which makes a healthy national life an 
impossible thing. These great party combina- 
tions, instead of being combinations of citi- 
zens to carry wise measures in the interest of 
the people, are only combinations of politicians 
to carry elections in their interest. . . . The 
party oligarchy under which we now suffer is not 
the creation of any one set of men. The present 
party leaders are not responsible for its exist- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 99 

ence; they are not to be blamed for it. It is the 
natural legitimate fruit of our government sys- 
tem.'' 

"Factions, which at one time seem bent on tear- 
ing each other to pieces, may at another time be 
seen snuggled together cheek by jowl. These ad- 
justments of interest are sometimes entered into 
under written covenants as formal as in regular 
business negotiation. Of course, such instru- 
ments rarely see the light of day, for even faction 
fury is slow to commit such an imprudence, 
yet such a thing has happened. A quarrel of 
Pennsylvania factions made public a remarkable 
draught of a treaty between state and local polit- 
ical interests, the preamble of which set forth 
that it was for 'mutual political and business ad- 
vantage.' [See Pittsburg newspapers of March 
16th, 1896.] . . . 

"The political class, like every class of business 
men, includes great variety of talent and char- 
acter. Vulgar cheats and ordinary rogues get 
into politics and use their opportunities for their 
own pelf with as little regard for the interest of 
their party as they dare reveal. This class of 
politicians sometimes invades city councils and 
state legislatures, to such an extent, as to stamp 
those bodies with their character. Indeed, it may 
( be said to be the rule that lobby influence, which, 
within its legitimate field, of advocacy, is a val- 
uable and a really necessary adjunct of legisla- 



100 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

tion, is compelled to assume a corrupt character, 
and it must select, for its principal service, agents 
skilled in systematic bribery." 

Sec. 41. The Machine. — The student of our poli- 
tics and the reader of our newspapers often en- 
counters the term "machine" in the meaning of a 
political party, though he never finds the same 
word in the same signification in British or 
French usage. There is a reason for the differ- 
ence. No other national parties are such ma- 
chines as are ours. 

Office in the United States is given by a politi- 
cal party under the conditions that the recipient 
will be controlled, in his official action, by the 
principles, interests, and usages of the organiza- 
tion, and that he will be governed by the idea 
that he is part of the "machine" with all the 
movements of which he must keep in harmony. 
He must regard his party as the only safe guar- 
dian of the welfare of the country. He must 
never do or say anything that will bring it into 
discredit, and therefore must not publish its 
delinquencies or prosecute its crimes. 

Believing that the success of their party is nec- 
essary to the welfare of the country, many zealous 
American partisans habitually guide their conduct 
by the maxim "our party right or wrong," and do 
not hesitate to be guilty of falsehood or fraud in 
its service. They act as if the public treasury 
were to be open, without strict supervision, to 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 101 

their associates; and as if embezzlement by their 
political friends should never be made a subject of 
criminal prosecution or scandalous exposure. 
Therefore it is that in many cases of theft from the 
public treasury, discovered by honest men, there 
is no prosecution. The general sentiment among 
the men influential in political circles is that such 
matters should, if possible, be kept secret. The 
exposure discredits the party and weakens it at 
the approaching election. The defalcations that 
come before the courts are numerous; but those 
that do not are still more numerous. A trust- 
worthy gentleman, an intimate friend of mine, 
told me that when he held a responsible position 
in the municipal government of San Francisco, 
many years ago, he employed an accountant to ex- 
amine the pecuniary affairs of a certain office in 
which many clerks had opportunities to collect 
fees from the public; and this accountant found 
that nineteen out of twenty of those clerks had 
pocketed moneys that should have gone into the 
treasury of the city. The embezzlers were com- 
pelled to pay up, so far as their embezzlement 
could be traced, but they were not prosecuted, nor 
dismissed from their places, nor exposed in the 
newspapers. About 1896 numerous thefts of pro- 
visions and supplies were committed in the Napa 
Insane Asylum by the servants of the State, and 
the Governor of California put a detective among 
the servants, who found the offenders. Not one of 



102 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

them was prosecuted or exposed in the newspa- 
pers but all were dismissed. In 1862 a forged 
certificate was sent to the Secretary of State of 
California declaring that polls had been opened 
at the precinct of Big Springs, Mono County, and 
that so many votes had been given for various can- 
didates. According to this paper, a large major- 
ity had been given in this precinct for the Demo- 
cratic ticket, so large that it gave majorities to the 
candidates for Senator and Assemblymen for the 
county. The proofs that the certificate was fraud- 
ulent, that no polls had been opened there, and no 
population sufficient to cast one-tenth of the vote 
reported existed there, were overwhelming; but 
the Democratic Senate declared the certificate 
true and admitted the Democratic Senator; and 
the Eepublican Assembly declared the certificate 
fraudulent and admitted the Eepublican Assem- 
blyman. The records of many of the legislative 
bodies of the United States abound with similar 
incidents. The party, right or wrong, is the motto 
of the zealous partisan. 

Sec. 42. The Boss. — The political system of the 
United States is a government of the people by the 
party for the benefit of the bosses. It is a system 
of plundering the many by the few, and those few, 
the basest class who control any civilized state. 
They are worse than the worst ruling class in Eu- 
rope. The chief institutions of the political party 
in the United States are the boss, the journalistic 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 103 

organ, the township club, and the primary elec- 
tion, the county, state and national committees 
and conventions. 

The Boss is the most prominent and potent in- 
stitution of American politics. He is the head 
and manager of his party in every township, coun- 
ty or state, unless his power is shared by associ- 
ates, as is often the case. If there are several, 
they usually work together because there is more 
profit for them in harmonious than in conflicting 
action. The Boss understands all the tricks of 
partisan management and gives much of his time 
to it. He is familiar with the active politicians in 
his district, and in case that the parties are nearly 
equally divided, not unfrequently agrees with the 
leader of the other side about a method of manag- 
ing the campaign, so that each shall be sure of a 
profit in any event. If dishonest, as he is in a ma- 
jority of cases, he levies a tribute on the public 
treasury or percentage on the salaries of those 
who obtain office by his help. The township Boss 
usually allies himself with the county boss, and 
the latter with the state boss if there be such a 
personage, though in most of the states there is 
none. The Boss attains his greatest power and 
the most plunder in the large and rich cities, and 
especially in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, 
Baltimore and San Francisco. 

The mastery of the Boss implies the helplessness 
of intelligent public opinion, a condition full of 



104 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

danger in a republican country, if not inconsistent 
with the essence of republicanism. Henry C. Ad- 
ams (Finance 144) complains that "the problem in 
the United States at the present time pertains to 
the control of the legislature." But why does he 
limit the evil to one department of the govern- 
ment? The evils pervade all and are highly per- 
nicious in the administrative as well as in the leg- 
islative department. 

"The Boss and the Machine," as Godkin re- 
marks (80, 156,) "hold the keys to all our 
leading offices. It is they who say whether 
a man shall ever be allowed to compete 
for public favor. It is they who decide 
whether a second term in office shall be ac- 
corded to him, whether his career in public life 
shall be closed or continued. This question, as he 
knows well, is determined by considerations 
which have little to do with the real value of his 
public services. It is determined by secret rules 
of distribution in the matter of offices, of which 
every boss has a code. Whether the man shall 
have a nomination depends largely, not on his ex- 
position of political doctrine or on his advocacy of 
certain measures, but, on his services as an in- 
strumentality for the division of patronage; for it 
is with patronage simply, and but rarely of policy, 
that the boss occupies himself. . . . 

"Few or none of the bosses have ever been writ- 
ers or speakers or have ever been called on to dis- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 105 

cuss public questions or have opinions about them. 
The principal ones, Tweed, Kelly, Croker [three 
bosses of New York City], Piatt [state boss of 
New York] and Quay [of Philadelphia and Penn- 
sylvania] have been either silent or illiterate men, 
famed for their reticence and have plumed them- 
selves on their ability to do things without talk. 
In New York they have succeeded in diffusing 
among the masses, to a certain extent, the idea 
that a statesman should not talk but simply 'fix 
things.' " ' l i i 

Sec. 43. The Cinch. — One of the most common 
and most productive forms of public plunder is 
known in New York as "striking," and in Califor- 
nia as "cinching," corporations. State legisla- 
tures have authority to regulate railway fares and 
city council to fix the charges that may be col- 
lected by corporations for gas, electricity, water 
and tramway transportation, and to demand 
statements about the cost of works and of man- 
agement, as bases for prices. A contribution 
made nominally to the campaign fund of the dom- 
inant party, but really to the private purse of its 
boss, is often the only way to escape from a ruin- 
ous reduction or a long and costly litigation. 

According to the Forum of June, 1897, the pay- 
ment of money to the boss by corporations was 
then a common custom in New York City, and was 
considered necessary as a means of protection 
against more costly forms of official robbery. A 



106 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

leading lawyer, Mr. W. H. Peckham, declared pub- 
licly that he knew that two corporations each paid 
$50,000 yearly. Mr. H. A. Havemeyer, President 
of the sugar trust, testified before a congressional 
committee in June 1894, that every wealthy in- 
dustrial corporation in New York did such things. 
Mr. E. C. Benedict, a director in many corpora- 
tions, said that "the government of this state 
[New York] is in three houses, and the third 
house [the lobby] does business on the principle 
of 'stand and deliver.' That's the way the legisla- 
ture treats corporations. I am mentioning no 
names but I will say that the present ruler [boss] 
is as much more expensive than the former one, of 
a different political stripe, as an educated high- 
priced man is than an ignorant low-priced one." 

Mr. W. D. Guthrie a respectable and able mem- 
ber of the New York bar said in a speech in Car- 
negie Hall, New York on December 23rd 1896; 
"Since the days of Tweed, a new system of politi- 
cal corruption has come into existence. The indi- 
vidual legislator is now seldom directly bribed. 
Corporations or individuals, seeking protection or 
valuable charter rights at the hands of the legisla- 
ture, retain a recognized political boss and pay 
him for the service to be rendered. This secures 
the desired favor. They pretend that these pay- 
ments are contributions to the party, but, as a 
matter of fact, they are tributes to the fund of 
the boss, who turns over to the national, state or 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 107 

county committee as much of the spoil as he sees 
fit, distributing most of it for the purpose of elect- 
ing to the legislature his own nominees. In form, 
it is a contribution to the party; in substance and 
truth, it is bribery and black-mail. Most of these 
contributions are made by corporations. The 
items are entered on their books under fictitious 
sundry accounts and hidden from public investi- 
gation." 

E. L. Godkin (Unforeseen Influences, 161.) says 
"Nothing is known certainly about the amounts 
levied in this way, but there are two thousand 
corporations in New York [city] exposed to legis- 
lative attack, and in the aggregate their contribu- 
tions must reach a very large sum. Since the boss 
has obtained command of the legislature as well 
as of the city, — that is since Tweed's time, — they 
are literally at the mercy of the legislature, or, 
in other words, at his mercy. Their taxes may be 
raised, or, in the case of gas companies or rail- 
road companies, their charges lowered. The fav- 
orite mode of bringing insurance companies to 
terms is ordering an examination of their assets, 
which may be done through the superintendent 
of insurance, who is an appointee of the govern- 
or and Senate, or, virtually, of the boss. This ex- 
amination has to be paid for by the company and, 
I am told, may be made to cost $200,000; it is 
usually conducted by politicians out of a job, of 
a very inferior class. To protect themselves from 



108 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

annoyances of this sort, the corporations, which 
it mnst be remembered are creations of the law, 
and increase in number every year, are only too 
glad to meet the demands of the boss. Any 
campaign contribution, no matter how large, and 
it is sometimes as high as f 50,000 or even $100,000, 
is small compared to the expense which he can in- 
flict on them by his mere fiat." 

The Boss as the same author says (118) "sum- 
mons from every quarter needy young men and 
helps them to get into places where they will be 
able to add to their pay by some sort of corrup- 
tion however disguised, perhaps rarely direct 
bribery but too often black-mail or a share in 
jobs. To such it is not necessary that the legis- 
lature should be an agreeable place, so long as 
it promises a livelihood. This system is already 
working actively in some states; it is spreading 
to others and is most perceptible in the great cen- 
ters of affairs. It is an abuse too, which, in a 
measure, creates what it feeds upon. The more 
legislatures are filled with bad characters, the 
less inducement there is for men of a superior or- 
der to enter them; for it is true of every sort of 
public service, from the army up to the cabinet, 
that men are influenced as to entering it by the 
kind of company they will have to keep." 

The American citizen as Moffett remarks (Sug- 
gestion 8) "is fond of calling himself a sovereign. 
As a rule however his only act of sovereignty is 



RE-FORM OR REVOLUTION? 109 

that of deciding which of two bosses shall rule 
over him. When the two bosses are privately in 
partnership, as they often are, the principle of in- 
dependent self-government, as we practice it, is 
carried to its logical limit." It then reaches its 
illogical limit when they are not partners. 

Sec. 44. The Organ. — Next to the Boss, the 
most prominent if not the most pernicious institu- 
tion of the American Party System is its Journal- 
istic Organ, the average daily of the city and the 
weekly of the county. It owes its existence to the 
office-seeking class, panders to their low policy, 
and often owes much of its profit to the public 
printing which it gets from them corruptly. 
Most of its readers want something better in- 
tellectually and morally but they are not organ- 
ized and they do not control the plunder of the 
treasury and therefore they cannot maintain news- 
papers adapted to their tastes. The main duties 
of the Journalistic Organ are to assert that the 
enforcement of the party's platform will sup- 
ply all the political wants of the country; that the 
boss is a noble patriot; that the Spoils System en- 
ables the people to retain control of the govern- 
ment; that civil service reform would establish an 
office-holding aristocracy; that capital is the 
enemy of labor; and that monopolies and trusts 
are the greatest dangers to free institutions. 

It is a mistake to believe the common assertion 
that the newspapers are as good as the community 



X10 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

which supports them. The public opinion is 
above the level of its corrupt journalists and of- 
fice holders, but having fallen under their yoke has 
not been able to emancipate itself from them. 
The Party System has blinded some and muzzled 
others of those who should have led the way to 
reform, but the multitude will overthrow the 
abuses of the present, as their ancestors over- 
threw those of the past. 

A large part of the business of the partisan 
managers and their journalistic and stump-speak- 
ing sycophants is to magnify the importance of 
small questions, to minimize that of large ones, 
to mislead the people with false ideas, and to fill 
them with the hope of receiving services that are 
not to be rendered to them. Therefore great 
outcries are made about matters of relatively little 
significance, and promises are published with no 
intention of keeping them. If any large class has 
conceived a prejudice in ignorance and folly that 
it is the victim of oppression by some other class 
with a smaller number of votes, the politicians 
will do their utmost to strengthen the prejudice 
and increase the folly for the purpose of catching 
the votes of the many. 

Sec. 45. The Club. — Third among the institu- 
tions of the Party System, coming after the Boss 
and the Journalistic Organ, is the Township Club, 
an association that pretends to represent all the 
members of the party in its township, but really 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? HI 

represents only the managers of the local organ- 
ization, and is so constituted that they and their 
followers have ordinarily complete control of all 
its proceedings. They exact a promise from all 
members of obedience to the majority, and this 
majority consists of men subject to their orders. 
In 1858 out of 58,000 Republican voters in New 
York city only 800 belonged to the Clubs, which 
made the nominations; and in some other cases, 
the proportion of club members to voters has 
been even less. 

The Club directs the local work of the party. 
It designates the nominees for the township of- 
fices and the delegates to the county convention 
which makes up the county ticket, or if such busi- 
ness is to be done through the agency of a primary 
election, it manages that affair, selects the men to 
receive and count the ballots, fixes the time and 
place, and formulates the qualifications of voters 
in such a manner that the independent and in- 
telligent voters generally shall not participate, or 
at least shall not obtain control. 

Sec. 46. The Convention. — The township club or 
the primary election designates delegates to a 
county convention which nominates candidates 
for county office, and elects a county committee 
and delegates to a state convention. An aspirant 
to a county office, whom we shall call Smith, a 
member of the dominant party, wants to be sheriff. 
With a commendatory letter from the county 



112 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

boss, he visits all the townships a month or two 
before the county delegates are to be chosen, sees 
the township boss or bosses, explains his plans, 
listens to theirs, tries to come to an agreement 
for their gratification and his own and promises 
to reward them for successful efforts in his ser- 
vice. He seeks the aid of the Justice of the Peace, 
the Constable and the Postmaster; if he is an in- 
fluential man, they want his help and give theirs 
in return. Taking advantage of their personal 
feeling and political ambition, Smith manages to 
secure a dozen supporters, if possible, in each vil- 
lage, and when the time for the township meet- 
ing comes round, they visit their friends and urge 
them to attend and to vote for the men selected 
as Smith's delegates. Out of two hundred Ee- 
publican voters in a township, perhaps thirty at- 
tend the meeting; twenty, including three op- 
posed to Smith, understand, or feel an interest in 
the proceedings, and Smith's delegates are 
chosen. If in this manner Smith carries a ma- 
jority of the townships he is certain, before the 
convention meets, of the nomination. If he have 
only a third or fourth part, he will agree with a 
candidate for another office, to join forces or, per- 
haps, with others, until the combination is strong 
enough to make a majority of the Convention. 
Sometimes the delegates object to being traded 
off, but usually they are entirely under the con- 
trol of the man in whose interest they were 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? H3 

chosen. Not nn frequently he pays all their ex- 
penses in attending the Convention. They may 
spend a day in going to the County Seat, another 
in returning, and sit in the Convention two days, 
making four in all. Generally the members of 
Conventions are not disposed to do such things for 
nothing. They expect something in return, and 
often demand cash for their votes from candidates 
to whom they have made no promises. 

It is ordinarily understood that the delegate 
pledged to a certain candidate will not only vote 
for him, but will accept all the bargains and ful- 
fill all the pledges necessary to secure his nomina- 
tion; but after that is gained, he is free, and may 
make as much for himself as the situation per- 
mits. Most of the members of the Convention of 
a dominant party are pledged before they are 
elected; otherwise the managers would not fore- 
know the result as to the most important places 
and would fail in the chief business entrusted to 
them. The state and national conventions are 
managed on similar principles. 

Every sheriff, county clerk, recorder, treasurer, 
tax collector, and assessor has the exclusive au- 
thority to appoint his subordinates; and these 
places are greatly coveted because the hours are 
brief, the work easy and the pay twice or three 
times as much as the deputy could get in any 
other occupation. Such appointments are often 
given to pay for aid in securing the nomination. 



114 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Thus when Smith and Jones are aspirants for the 
office of Sheriff, they may find that if both keep 
the field, both will probably be defeated, but that 
if they combine, one of them can certainly be 
elected. Then they may toss up for the nomina- 
tion, with the stipulation that the winner shall 
give the place of chief deputy to the loser. In 
many cases the friend who gives security for the 
official, designates the chief deputy who is to have 
charge of the books and funds. The deputy who 
has no strong backing may have to contribute a 
share of his salary every month, to the man who 
appointed him or secured his appointment. 

Custom, now well established, requires every 
national convention that nominates a presidential 
ticket to set forth in a Platform the principles 
which will guide the representatives of the party 
if it should obtain control of the administration. 
The election of the candidates closes the contract 
between the voters and the new officials. That is 
the theory; the practice is that partisan managers 
try to cheat the multitude with ambiguous phrases. 
A common feature of political hypocrisy is that 
the opposition accuses the administration of vio- 
lating the constitution and yet adopts similar 
measures when it obtains the power; and justi- 
fies itself by the assertion that it is so honest that 
it can safely do things which would be very dan- 
gerous if done by the rogues of the other side. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 115 

Sec. 47. Internal Improvements. — For the pur- 
pose of catching votes in doubtful campaigns, all 
the Republican and Democratic national conven- 
tions from 1872 till 1892, to the great disgust of 
the machine politicians who were a large majority, 
of the delegates, promised a reform of the federal 
civil service, "honest civil service reform," as the 
Democratic convention called it in 1884; and both 
parties enacted laws to secure the appointment of 
officials for merit and to secure their retention 
in office during good behavior. In 1896, the 
Democrats, who had emancipated themselves 
from the influence of Cleveland, grew tired of 
their hypocrisy and declared against "life tenure 
in office" and in favor of return to the spoils. 
Then the Republican administration, released 
from its fear of being outbid in this matter by the 
opposition, threw open to the spoilsmen many 
offices from which they had been excluded for 
years. 

The region south of the Potomac and Ohio 
rivers does not possess any long land route of the 
first importance for commerce, nor before 1830 did 
its traffic demand any great canal or macada- 
mized road; and partly because of these facts the 
Democratic party, which had its stronghold in 
that part of the Union, was hostile to the "in- 
ternal improvements" at the expense of the fed- 
eral treasury. While the south had no enter- 
prises of this kind, the north was going ahead with 



116 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

wonderful energy. The Erie Oanal connecting 
the Hudson river with Lake Erie was the most 
extensive, the most costly and the most brilliantly 
successful industrial enterprise of its time. It 
stimulated Pennsylvania to make her canal from 
the Delaware to the Ohio ; Ohio to make two from 
Lake Erie to the Ohio; Indiana to make one from 
Lake Erie to the Wabash; and Illinois to make 
one from Lake Michigan to the Illinois river. In 
1815 Congress, had declared by resolution that it 
had constitutional authority to construct post 
roads, and though the strict constructionists pro- 
tested, this view prevailed in the government for 
more than a dozen years. In accordance with it, 
the National Road was planned to be about six 
hundred miles long from the Ohio river opposite 
Wheeling to the Mississippi opposite St. Louis 
through Indianapolis, nearly straight in its 
course, and a hundred feet wide, with a well 
graded bed of macadam, the grandest wagon road 
ever surveyed. It was completed through Ohio 
and work on it was then stopped by President 
Jackson. Under his influence the Democratic 
platforms of 1840 and 1844 declared that the fed- 
eral government had no constitutional authority 
to make internal improvements, and this policy 
prevailed until 1860. Since then the Democrats 
have denied the right of Congress to appropriate 
money for such purposes, and have striven to get 
as many and as large appropriations as possible 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 117 

for the Democratic states. In 1892 and 1896, 
their platforms declared in favor of the improve- 
ment of the Mississippi river, and by this they 
meant the lower part of the river where it runs 
through Democratic territory. Consistency is not 
allowed to stand in the way of profit. 

Sec. 48. Demagogism. — For the purpose of catch- 
ing votes the partisan managers do not hesitate 
to make the most disgraceful, dishonest and un- 
patriotic concessions. Such were the Kentucky 
resolutions by the National Democratic Conven- 
tions of 1852 and 1856 asserting the rights of se- 
cession and nullification, and such also was the 
resolution of the Democratic National Convention 
of 1896 promising that the Party if victorious, 
would pass an act providing that in certain cases 
of contempt of court, the offender should not be 
punished until after a jury trial. This was an im- 
plied promise that in case of another Pullman 
riot, the federal authorities would not interfere 
but would let the Railway Companies and the 
mob settle their controversies in their own way. 
In that Pullman affair, Eugene Debs, as Presi- 
dent of the American Railway Union, violated an 
order of the federal Court in Chicago and had 
been sent to jail for several months in punish- 
ment, an act that contributed much to the restora- 
tion of order. To provide for the jury trial of a 
contempt of court would be an effective method 
of making the courts contemptible for inefficiency. 



118 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

This Democratic bid for the votes of the Chicago 
rioters and their sympathizers elicited from H. J. 
Ford (American Politics 329) the remark that 
"Party organization, therefore, exploits outbreaks 
of popular folly and knavery, and caters to the 
prejudices of ignorance and fanaticism in a way 
that invests them with factitious importance and 
confers upon them inordinate legislative in- 
fluence. This feature of American politics, more 
than any other, causes the national character to 
be misunderstood, and the worth of democratic 
institutions to be undervalued." 

Prof. Hyslop (220) says "In the recent Presiden- 
tial election, [1896] where the issue was largely 
the repudiation of public and private debts, and 
the withdrawal of federal interference in labor 
strikes against railways and enterprises involv- 
ing public interests, and perhaps all strikes what- 
ever, the regular Democratic nominee of the 
Chicago Convention supporting this demand, 
which threatened to lead straight to anarchy, 
the inmates of the New Haven (Conn.) jail were 
asked their presidential preferences. Of two hun- 
dred and ninety-one prisoners, two hundred and 
eighty-four were for the regular Democratic 
nominee, and only six for the Kepublican, and one 
undecided,, he being insane. It would have been 
interesting to have obtained a general census of 
the preferences among the criminals of the whole 
country." 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 119 

If the spirit, of Democracy were properly repre- 
sented by the National Convention of 1896, it 
would be a base and pernicious plan of govern- 
ment, much worse than an .enlightened despotism. 

A peculiar feature of our political system is the 
"pivotal vote"; that is the vote of a small class 
of persons who, in many elections, hold the deci- 
sive positions, and may be controlled by fraud. 
In the average presidential election, two-fifths of 
the States are surely Republican; two-fifths are 
surely Democratic; and the, other fifth may be un- 
certain. Upon these most of the energies and 
money of the campaign managers is spent. In 
these doubtful States, there are small classes of 
voters, not more than one in ten of all in these 
respective States and in the aggregate not one in 
a hundred of all in the Union, who are ready to 
vote for some liberal concession to their local in- 
terests, or some excitement of their passions. 
These relatively few voters hold the result in 
their hands and it is the characteristic triumphs 
of a presidential campaign to capture these fools. 
The energy of both parties is largely turned to 
this ambition; and the false promise, the am- 
biguous promise on the platform, and the forgery 
published a day or two before the election when 
there is no time for controverting proof, are 
familiar parts of our political history. Dema- 
gog! sm is as old as popular government but never 
in any other country did it approach the baseness 
that it has reached among us. 



120 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

The special object, selected just now for abuse 
by the demagogues, is the Trust, a combination of 
corporations, which owe their existence to statu- 
tory enactment, must manage their business 
under statutory limitations, and, in many cases, 
must buy exemption from legislative plunder by 
paying black-mail to the boss. Instead of de- 
manding specific amendments of the corporation 
law, the demagogues denounce the trusts in gen- 
eral terms. 

Sec. 49. Rotation.— The treatment of 400,000 
federal, state, county, ,city and township offices, 
as the spoils of partisan warfare to be distrib- 
uted anew after biennial or quadrennial elec- 
tions, is a peculiar and most .pernicious feature 
of the American political system. It fills the 
government with corruption, extravagance, in- 
efficiency and inexperience, and has led to the 
general adoption of the rule among office holders 
that under ordinary circumstances, they must 
conceal the delinquencies and ,embezzlements of 
their associates. 

A peculiar feature of American polity is the 
brevity of the term, usually not more than two 
years in the city or county, or four years in the 
state or national office. One and perhaps the 
main purpose of the brevity is to permit frequent 
rotation, so that many of those who have contrib- 
uted much to the victory of the party, should, in 
succession, share its spoils which are the funds 
collected from the people by taxation. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 121 

Kotation is a device to give the control of the 
government to the professional politicians. It 
drives the good from the public service and re- 
tains the bad. It degrades the nation by giving 
places to incompetent men; for competency is an 
acquirement not to be obtained without many 
years of experience. The man who is success- 
ful in business or sees that he is on the sure road 
to success, will not accept office because he can do 
better and maintain his self-respect in private 
station. The average office seeker is a man who 
has failed in his attempts to get into other profit- 
able occupation, and takes to politics as a last 
resort. He knows that he lacks the education 
and experience needed for the place but consoles 
himself with the thought that he is as good as the 
other aspirants. When he obtains it his chief 
ambition is not to qualify himself for it but to 
gain influence with the party managers to secure 
a renomination. 

Brief official terms had their origin in New 
England where the towns annually elected and 
usually reelected their clerk, treasurer, constable 
and councilors, and had excellent administrations 
because the voters were few, intelligent, per- 
manent and well acquainted with one another. 
But the same system led to pernicious results 
when adopted by large communities of less in- 
telligent and less permanent citizens, who in 
many cases voted for candidates of whom they 



122 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

knew nothing. The argument for short terms is 
thus made in the constitution of Maryland: "A 
long continuance in the executive departments of 
power or trust is, dangerous to liberty; a rotation 
therefore in these departments is one of the best 
securities of permanent freedom." This assumes 
that it is better to have a succession of incompe- 
tents and thieves succeeding one another an- 
nually, — that is the practical result of annual 
elections generally, — than to have . one honest 
and competent man in the office continuously. 
The security for permanent freedom in a succes- 
sion of incompetents and rogues is . not self-evi- 
dent. 

Sec. 50. Office Begging. — The custom of begging 
for office is a prominent feature of American 
political life and is adopted at one time or an- 
other by about one voter out of five, if not by, a 
larger proportion. The beggar not only solicits 
a place but demands that the person, to whom he 
applies, shall give him a long and respectful hear- 
ing, under the penalty of driving the applicant 
with his friends into the other party. 

Every official, who has authority to appoint 
many subordinates, from the President down, ac- 
cepts his place with the implied promise that his 
conduct will be controlled by regard for the in- 
terests of his party, that he will not offend its 
voters and that he will maintain the custom of 
permitting the office beggar, to intrude into his 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 123 

home, to shake his hand, and occupy his time with 
the solicitation of political favors. Benjamin Har- 
rison wrote thus (This Country of Ours, 111. 166. 
174): "The President's popular receptions begin 
the next day after his inauguration, and are con- 
tinued for a good many days without much re- 
gard to hours. When the great East Room fills 
up he goes down and takes his station .near the 
door of exit. The head usher introduces some 
who are known or who make their names known 
to him, but generally the visitors make known 
their own names to the President, or pass with a 
hand-shake without any introduction, — often at 
the rate of forty or fifty to the minute. In the 
first three weeks of an administration the Presi- 
dent shakes hands with from 40,000 to 60,000 per- 
sons. The physical drain of this is very great, 
and if the President is not an instructed hand- 
shaker a lame arm and a swollen hand soon re- 
sult. This may be largely, or entirely avoided by 
using President Hayes's method, — take the hand 
extended to you and grip it before your hand is 
gripped. It is the passive hand that gets hurt. 

"When the inaugural visitors have disappeared 
these popular East Room receptions are brought 
into order and occur usually three times a week 
at one o'clock. It, has been suggested that a bow 
should be substituted for the hand-shake; but it 
would be quite as admissible to suggest a revi- 
sion of the Declaration of Independence. The in- 



124 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

terest which multitudes attach to a hand-shake 
with the President is so great that people will en- 
dure the greatest discomfort and not a little peril 
to life and limb to attain it. These are not the 
office-seekers, but the unselfish, honest-hearted, 
patriotic people whose 'Grod bless you' is a prayer 
and a benediction. They come to Washington for 
the inauguration, and later with visiting excur- 
sions, but they are mostly to be found near their 
own homes. They come out to meet the Presi- 
dent when he takes a journey, and his contact 
with them, and their affectionate interest in him, 
revive his courage and elevate his purposes. Mr. 
Lincoln is said to have called these popular re- 
ceptions his 'public opinion baths.' . . . 

"Unless the President is very early, he will find 
some callers waiting for him as he passes through 
the Cabinet room to his office. The rules, which 
are displayed on large cards, announce that the 
President will receive persons having business 
with him between certain hours, usually from 
9.30 or 10 A. M. until 1 P.M., except on Mondays; 
but the hours and the exception are very little re- 
garded, and it is a rare piece of good fortune, dur- 
ing the early months of an administration, if the 
President gets one wholly uninterrupted hour at 
his desk each day. His time is so broken into 
bits that he is often driven to late night work, 
or to set up a desk in his bedroom, when prepar- 
ing a message or other paper requiring unbroken 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 125 

attention. Thoughtlessness is the root of all this. 
<I only want five minutes'; and if he were the 
only one it could be spared; but his double is at 
his heels, and the urgent public business is post- 
poned or done at night with a jaded mind. It may 
be said that untimely visitors should be excluded, 
and so they should; but thoughtfulness on their 
part would be a cure without a smart. The Presi- 
dent's messenger brings in the cards or announces 
orally the names of the visitors, and they are ad- 
mitted singly, or all are ushered, as they arrive, 
into the President's office, as he may direct. He 
usually receives them standing near his desk — 
especially when a number are present — and in the 
order of their official station, if they are public 
officers. Those not engaged with the President 
stand back, and the conversation with each, as he 
is received, is conducted in a low tone that se- 
cures some degree of privacy. There are many 
Senators and Kepresentatives, often accompanied 
by friends or constituents, either singly or in 
delegations, sometimes simply to pay their re- 
spects, but more often to urge some appointment. 
"In the latter case the President listens, and 
seems to the applicant to be painfully reticent. 
He concludes the brief interview by saying: 
'Please file your papers in the proper department, 
and I will consider the matter.' This incident is 
repeated over and over — perhaps a hundred times 
in the course of a morning. The business has not 



126 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

been much advanced, if at all. The appointment 
may not come before the President for action for 
several months, and in the nature of things he can 
recall little, if anything, of what was said so long 
before. He has been told that Mr. A — , an appli- 
cant for the post-office at — , is a dissipated, dis- 
reputable man, and that Mr. B — , who wants the 
same place, possesses all of the virtues and talents 
of the highest order; but if the President depended 
upon his memory these vices and virtues might be 
wrongly assigned. All this is explained over 
and over again to applicants and their friends, 
but the feeling that something is, or may be, 
gained by a personal interview prevails, and for 
the first year and a half of an administration the 
President spends from four to six hours of each 
day talking about things he will not have to act 
upon for months, while the things that ought to 
be done presently are hurtfully postponed. Gen- 
erally in the case of home places, the application 
is for a particular office, but in very many cases, 
especially as to consular places, the application is 
general — for a place to be hunted up by the Presi- 
dent and fitted to the applicant. Such cases are 

particularly trying 

"The Civil Service Law has removed a large 
number of minor offices in the departments at 
Washington and in the postal and other services, 
from the scramble of politics, and has given the 
President, the Cabinet officers and the Members 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 127 

of Congress great relief; but it still remains true 
that in the power of appointment to office the 
President finds the most exacting, unrelenting and 
distracting of his duties. In the nature of things 
he begins to make enemies from the start and has 
no way of escape, — it is fate; and to a sensitive 
man involves much distress of mind. His only 
support is in the good opinion of those who chiefly 
care that the public business shall be well done 
and are not disturbed by the consideration 
whether this man or that man is doing it; but he 
hears very little directly from this class. No 
President can conduct a sucessful administration 
without the support of Congress; and this matter 
of appointments, do what he will, often weakens 
that support. It is for him always a sort of com- 
promise between his ideal and the best attainable 
thing." 

George W. Julian, who was a member of Con- 
gress for more than twenty years, gives in his 
Recollectims (323) this account of some of his 
troubles with office-seekers. "During the winter 
[1868-9] preceding the inauguration of the Presi- 
dent I was besieged by place-hunters more than 
ever before. They thronged about me constantly, 
while I generally wrote from twenty to thirty let- 
ters per day in response to inquiries about ap- 
pointments from my district. The squabbles over 
post-office appointments were by far the most 
vexatious and unmanageable. They were singu- 



128 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

larly fierce, and I found it wholly impossible to 
avoid making enemies of men who had supported 
me with zeal. I was tormented for months about 
the post-office of a single small town in Franklin 
county, where the rival parties pounced upon each 
other like cannibals, and divided the whole com- 
munity into two hostile camps. I was obliged to 
give my days and nights to this wretched business, 
and often received only curses for the sincerest 
endeavors to do what I believed was right. This 
experience became absolutely sickening, and 
could not be otherwise than seriously damaging 
to me politically." 

Sec. 51. Inexpmence. — Nowhere is official inex- 
perience more prominent or relatively more perni- 
cious than in the state legislatures, the majorities 
of which are made up of men who have never be- 
fore served in such a body or have had no legal 
education, and cannot draft a bill or understand 
its force when they read it. They serve for only 
three months, and in that brief period learn noth- 
ing about the science of law-making and yet they 
have the power to adopt new systems of revenue, 
to alter the guaranties of person and property, 
and to plunder the treasury. Because of the fre- 
quent great changes in the distribution of busi- 
ness and population, and also because of the es- 
tablished method of electing federal senators (of 
whom two must be elected in every six years) it is 
considered necessary that every legislature should 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 129 

meet biennially, if not annually, and the appro- 
priations for the maintenance of governmental in- 
stitutions are made for a term not exceeding two 
years. They must meet, but their session fills the 
intelligent business men generally with serious 
apprehension lest folly, ignorance and corruption 
combined do serious damage to the public inter- 
ests. When such a body adjourns without having 
done some highly discreditable and dishonest act, 
the people congratulate themselves on their es- 
cape. 

Sometimes it happens that an able and success- 
ful lawyer or merchant goes to the legislature, not 
for the purpose of serving the public, but with the 
object of passing some bill which if not corrupt in 
motive is at least questionable in policy, and could 
probably not become a law unless it were pushed 
by an influential man who devotes all his energies 
during the session to its support. Such a man 
does not go to the legislature for reputation, be- 
cause he knows that there is little prospect of suc- 
cess. Neither does he go for pecuniary profit 
from the official salary because the pay is small 
and is insufficient to compensate him for the inter- 
ruption and neglect of his ordinary business. He 
usually presents his bill late in the session, and its 
passage is the chief object of his legislative am- 
bition. For this he pleads, for this he makes 
friends, to this he devotes much of his energy, and 
in some cases for this he log-rolls and bribes. In 



130 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

San Francisco, for instance, the opening of Mont- 
gomery Avenue, the cutting through of the hill on 
Second Street, and the building of the City Hall 
on its present site, was each secured by a man who 
made it the special object of obtaining a seat in 
the legislature; and though in each case, the ad- 
vocate presumably believed that he would confer 
a benefit on the public as well as on himself, yet 
he would not have consented to serve in the legis- 
lature, if he had not desired to secure the adoption 
of a measure which would put a considerable sum 
of money into his pocket. The Montgomery Ave- 
nue and Second Street enterprises proved to be 
not only unprofitable to the public and to their 
respective legislative parents, but disgraceful to 
the city. 

Brief terms imply inefficiency as well as inex- 
perience. Competent men will not accept places 
that have no permanence. As a consequence of 
the rarity of high capacity and character among 
the officials, our government cannot safely under- 
take the work that is done with success by other 
governments. It does not own and manage sav- 
ings banks, and railways, and telegraphs, and tele- 
phones, and sewage farms, and lodging houses for 
the poor as is done by various European govern- 
ments. Few American cities own their water 
works, gas works, and electric light. Philadel- 
phia made its own gas and failing to manage the 
business honestly or economically, leased the es- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 131 

tablishment to a company of capitalists. The fed- 
eral government has numerous and very costly 
navy yards but its best ships are built under con- 
tract with independent ship-yards. 

In the United States, there are not three times 
as many people as in Great Britain, but, excluding 
the army and navy, there are five times as many 
officials, though the governmental work is not so 
extensive nor so well clone. The proportionate 
excess in the number of officials is caused mainly 
by their inexperience, inefficiency and dishonesty. 

Sec. 52. Corruption. — Official station in the 
United States often perverts those of its recipi- 
ents who were not, and increases the depravity of 
those who were previously base. Many will not 
accept bribes, neglect their duties or embezzle the 
public funds, but even these, usually, conceal or 
try to conceal the frauds and neglects of their as- 
sociates, who cannot be exposed and punished 
without a public scandal that may result in the 
defeat of the party and the consequent installation 
of another set of men equally corrupt. So long as 
the Spoils System is maintained, there is no hope 
for any permanent and secure improvement. No 
reform can be introduced by changing the thieves; 
and that is what the alternating dominion of fac- 
tion sometimes accomplishes in this country. 
The degree of depravity increases with the amount 
of revenue subject to control. No wonder that 
successful business men advise their able sons to 
keep out of politics. 



132 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

According to an opinion prevalent among intel- 
ligent men at least one-fifth of all the members of 
county, city, state and national legislatures and 
administrative boards in the United States, are 
corrupt men who seek and obtain official position 
with the intention of accepting bribes or embez- 
zling public money when favorable opportunity 
permits. Neither House of Congress or any legis- 
lature in any of the larger states has at any time 
within the last half century been above suspicion; 
and if as sometimes happens, a small state senate 
or city council or board leaves office with an un- 
blemished reputation the fact is considered won- 
derful. 

In an oration delivered at Dartmouth College 
in June, 1882, Senator James A. Bayard said : " A 
system has grown up gradually yet almost im- 
perceptibly in our government which has reached 
a point of growth and power that enables it to 
overthrow the main objects for which our consti- 
tution and laws were established and to substi- 
tute a system which enables men once vested with 
official power to use that power as a stepping 
stone for its own perpetuation and advancement 
regardless of all changes in the condition of popu- 
lar sentiment. . . . Thus gradually an army of 
mercenaries has been organized who are strong 
enough to control conventions and nominating as- 
semblies, set at defiance public opinion and laugh 
to scorn public conscience." 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 133 

In his Constitutional History (231) Simon Sterne 
says that "the Spoils System demoralizes both 
parties." Any influence that can corrupt the 
bosses who usually have a controlling influence in 
the Republican and Democratic organizations 
must be superlatively debasing. Bryce remarks 
correctly (1,384.) that the corner stone of practical 
politics in the United States is the Spoils System; 
if it were overthrown the partisan organizations 
as they now exist, would immediately disappear, 
or they would change so greatly that they would 
not know themselves. 

D. A. McKnight declares (The Electoral System 
of the United States, 330) that "since that date 
(1829) the American civil service has been a re- 
proach and a shame." In his True Republic (91) 
Albert Stickney asserts that "the political history 
of the United States, in the years since the war, 
has been a long story of corruption and miscon- 
duct on the part of public officers." In his Politi- 
cal Problem (28-36) the same author tells his read- 
ers that a large proportion of the officials in the 
United States obtain their places by the help of 
"professional election brokers," (that is what 
many of the bosses are;) and he implies that the 
officials must pay commission for the brokerage. 
There is no equal proportion of such corruption in 
any other enlightened country and George Wm. 
Curtis did not pass beyond the bounds of the 
truth when he said, after giving much attention to 



134 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

the subject, that the American civil service was 
"the worst in the world." 

According to D. B. Eaton (Lalor's Cyclopedia III 
783) "The unparalleled abuses in past years at the 
Xew York Post Office and Custom House and the 
municipal, judicial and other corruptions asso- 
ciated with the names of Barnard, McOunn, Tweed 
and Fisk at the city of New York have made the 
consequences of a long and general toleration of 
that [Spoils] System as a part of our familiar his- 
tory." 

Sec. 53. Election Frauds. — Many statutes have 
been enacted in the United States for the purpose 
of defrauding voters of a fair share of political 
power. One of the most common tricks is the 
gerrymander, by which the election districts are 
so arranged that some are to have very large ma- 
jorities of the party to be cheated, and others are 
to have small majorities of the party to be favored. 
By this method, with an equal number of votes, 
the gerrymandering side may gain three-fourths 
of the members of Congress or legislature to be 
elected in the state. With the help of such a law, 
the Democrats of Ohio, in 1862 when they had a 
minority of 25,000 votes, were enabled to elect 
fourteen out of nineteen congressmen. Both po- 
litical parties have made a practice of rewarding 
the men who devised and enacted gerrymandering 
bills, and thus indicate that for voters generally 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 135 

the partisan success is more prized than official 
integrity. 

Frauds in elections are frequent, and among 
them are stuffing the ballot box with ballots not 
cast; false returns; the reception of votes by non- 
residents; the reception of many ballots from a 
person who has a right to cast only one; the stuff- 
ing of the register by putting down the names of 
non-residents colonization or the transfer for elec- 
tion purposes of persons from one district to an- 
other; and bribery or payment for votes. These 
frauds have a large influence in the aggregate on 
the distribution of the offices. 

It is the business of the professional politician 
to hold himself up as the protector of the poor 
against their oppressors. Sixty years ago the 
great enemy against whom he roused the preju- 
dices of the ignorant was the beneficent national 
bank; afterward it became the protective tariff 
(which the great mass of the poor never felt), and 
now it is the trust, or great combination of capi- 
tal, which reduces the costs of production and dis- 
tribution and thus cheapens the prices of the 
necessaries and luxuries with great benefit to the 
multitude. 

Sec. 54. Broderick. — David C. Broderick, who 
misrepresented California in the Federal Senate 
from 1857 till 1859 was a good type of a bad sena- 
tor. He was the Democratic Boss of San Fran- 
cisco from 1851 till 1859, and during most of these 



136 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

years he had no business but politics, was without 
office, had no property known to have been ac- 
quired in a creditable way, and yet he had an 
abundance of money, obtained, it was reported by 
those who knew him well, by levying contribu- 
tions on those who were indebted to him for offi- 
cial positions. The Vigilance Committee which 
rose in 1856 against the city officials whom he had 
put in office, organized the People's Party to de- 
prive him of control over the city government, and 
succeeded in their purpose. He however managed 
to secure a large number of adherents in the legis- 
lature elected in November 1856, but not quite 
enough to give him the nomination for the federal 
senatorship. He secured the prize however by 
telling some friends of M. S. Latham that if he 
(Broderick) were elected senator he would like to 
have that gentleman for his colleague to be 
chosen at the same time as there were two vacan- 
cies. This declaration was meant and was under- 
stood to be an implied promise that if Broderick 
were nominated in the Democratic caucus by the 
aid of Latham's friends, Latham should be nom- 
inated by the aid of the friends of Broderick. 
Thus the latter secured his nomination and in- 
stead of giving his votes to Latham, he adjourned 
the caucus so that he might have time to make 
bargains with his chief rivals, Gwin and Latham, 
that they should let him have exclusive control of 
all the federal appointments in California, and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 137 

thus surrender control of the Democratic party in 
the state to him. His plan was to obtain written 
pledges to that effect from each of them, produce 
these pledges in the caucus as proofs that they had 
sold themselves to him, and use their public deg- 
radation as a power to get the nomination for his 
friend, J. W. McCorkle, who had no strength of his 
own. This scheme was foiled by the refusal of 
Latham to walk into the trap; Gwin, who gave 
the paper demanded, was elected. Broderick 
went to Washington and presented a list of the 
men whom he had selected for the federal offices in 
California to President Buchanan who consulted 
his old friend Gwin. The latter probably told the 
whole story, as he knew it; at any rate Buchanan 
refused to accept the recommendations and gave 
the places to enemies of Broderick. The latter 
then turned against the President, abused Gwin 
and Gwin's friends, and provoked a duel in which 
he was killed. 

Sec. 55. Clark. — A notable case of legislative 
corruption was exposed by testimony taken by 
a Congressional committee on the 6th, 8th, 11th 
and 13th of January 1900 in the case of Wm. A. 
Clark, Democrat, elected to the Federal Senate by 
the legislature of Montana. The evidence showed 
that Clark bought many votes, paying f 10,000 for 
Democrats and $5,000 for Republicans, and se- 
cured fifty-four out of ninety-six votes. The re- 



138 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

port of the Committee was filed on April 22nd and 
before the Senate could act on it, Clark resigned. 
Sec. 56. War Frauds. — In treating of the man- 
agement of the federal finances during the Civil 
War, Bolles remarks (231) that "The opportuni- 
ties for perpetrating frauds and making fortunes 
were improved so quickly that in a short time af- 
ter the war began the people generally were dis- 
turbed by the stories of peculation. At the July 
session in 1861 the speaker appointed a special 
committee to investigate them. Beside Mr. Van 
Wyck, the chairman, were six more members, E. 
B. Washburne, W. S. Holman, B. E. Fenton, H. 
L. Dawes, W. G. Steele, and James S. Jackson. 
The committee performed a vast amount of labor, 
and made three reports, the first on the 17th of 
December, containing over eleven hundred pages, 
the second on the 17th of July the following year, 
and which was a much larger document than the 
other, and a third and final report on the 3d of 
March, 1863. One of the gravest wrongs reported 
was the plain violation by the departments of the 
law which required them in making contracts to 
advertise for proposals and to accept the proposal 
of the lowest bidder. Instead of executing this 
reasonable requirement, the secretaries in many 
cases made contracts with their friends for the 
furnishing of supplies, justifying themselves on 
the ground of public exigency. Commissions 
were usually paid on the purchase-money, vary- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 139 

ing from two and one-half to five per cent. The 
committee recommended the passage of a resolu- 
tion condemning this practice, and it was passed 
unanimously. The resolution was especially aim- 
ed at the navy department, where most of these 
peculiar contracts appeared. Unhappily, they 
were not limited to that department. Others 
were found in the war department, which had 
been made during the administration of President 
Lincoln's first war secretary." 

W. Van Wyck chairman of the committee said 
"The mania for stealing seems to have run 
through all the relations of the government — al- 
most from the general to the drummer boy; from 
those nearest the throne of power to the nearest 
tide-waiter. Nearly every man who deals with 
the government seems to feel or desire that it 
would not long survive, and each had a common 
right to plunder while it lived. [Volunteer] 
colonels, intrusted with the power of raising regi- 
ments, colluding with contractors, bartering away 
and dividing contracts for horses and other sup- 
plies to enrich personal favorites, purchasing ar- 
ticles and compelling false invoices to be given. 
While it is no justification, the example has been 
set in the very departments of the government. 
As a general thing, none but favorites gain access 
there, and no others can obtain contracts which 
bear enormous profits. They violate the plain 
provisions of the law requiring bids and proposals 



140 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

on the false and shallow pretext that the public 
exigency requires it." 

Mr. Bolles (132) remarks that "The investigat- 
ing committee were subject to severe criticism 
from the time of beginning their work until the 
end of the Congress. Nearly every person who 
had wronged the government had friends, and 
sought to defend himself. Newspapers often 
fought valiantly for the peculators, and so did 
some of the members of Congress. The enemies 
of the committee were watchful, and improved 
every favorable opportunity for an assault. Espe- 
cially when the members were absent from the 
House, investigating, in New York or elsewhere, 
an assailant would deliver a speech in the House, 
and the news would be sent abroad that the in- 
vestigating committee had been attacked and no 
one had replied. In many ways the assailants 
sought to lessen the importance of the work of 
the committee, and to render the members un- 
popular. Mr. Koscoe Conkling, at that time a 
member of the House, sharply denounced the work 
of the committee, maintaining that 'the nation, 
the government, classes of individuals, and in- 
dividuals themselves, had suffered in character; 
that we had lost caste, and that much harm had 
come, not from detecting or exposing fraud or 
extravagance, but from magnifying and exagger- 
ating what had happened, and charging and pub- 
lishing to the world what had never happened at 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 141 

all.' His best known ally who assailed the com- 
mittee was Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana." 

Sec. 57. Simon Cameron. — Rumor current at the 
time, often reported in print and extensively be- 
lieved, asserted that the managers of the candi- 
dacy of Abraham Lincoln for the presidency in 
the National Republican Convention of 1860, held 
in Chicago, bought the vote of the Pennsylvania 
delegation by promising that Simon Cameron, of 
that state, should have a place in the Cabinet; but 
the biographers of Mr. Lincoln declare that he had 
not authorized any bargain of that kind, and that 
he considered it a most unpleasant duty to keep 
the contract and accept a man of extremely bad 
political reputation as one of his constitutional ad- 
visers. This story is told in Lamon's Life of 
Lincoln (p. 459). A congressional committee in- 
vestigated Mr. Cameron's management and made 
a report, (House of Representatives, 37th Congress, 
2d Session, Report No. 2) in which we read as fol- 
lows about some of the bargains made by the Sec- 
retary of War for the United States: "Five thou- 
sand carbines belonging to the Government were 
sold to a private individual for three dollars and 
fifty cents apiece, and were immediately repur- 
chased for the government for twenty-two dollars 
apiece, making a difference on this one transac- 
tion of nearly $90,000. One lot of these carbines 
suffered this process of sale and repurchase 
twice. They were first sold by the Government 



142 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

at a price merely nominal, and were repurchased 
at fifteen dollars apiece. They were again sold 
by the Government at the price above stated, of 
three dollars and fifty cents and again repur- 
chased at twenty-two dollars. How many other 
times these arms did service under the purchase 
and sale treatment, or whether they ever did ser- 
vice in the field, did not appear. 

"A certain contractor testified that he furnished 
supplies to the Government to the amount of 
$800,000, on which he made a profit of over forty 
per cent. The purchases from him were made in 
direct violation of law. Two politicians in New 
York, one of them an old personal and political 
friend of the Secretary of War, had $2,000,000 of 
Government money placed in a private banking- 
house, subject to their order for the purchase of 
supplies, in violation of law: $250,000 of this 
money they spent without ever accounting for any 
of it. It was in evidence that of this amount $10,- 
000 was paid for a large quantity of groceries sup- 
plied by a dealer in hardware. And another sum 
of over $20,000 was paid for straw hats and linen 
trousers. But no one in the army saw any of our 
troops decked in this fantastic costume. Within 
the period of one month $151,000 was paid for 
fortifications which were to be constructed at St. 
Louis, before even the contract for doing the work 
was executed. Two steamers were purchased by 
a friend of high Government officials for about 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 143 

$100,000, and were immediately sold to the Gov- 
ernment for $200,000. One steamer was chartered 
to the Government for $2500 a day, and the Gov- 
ernment paid $135,000 for a period in which she 
lay at a wharf before she was ever once nsed. 
One railroad company received for transportation 
in one year from the Government over $3,500,000, 
being an excess over the company's entire earn- 
ings for the previous year of $1,350,000 or about 
forty per cent, and the rates charged for this trans- 
portation were about thirty-three and one-third 
per cent, in excess of the rates paid by private in- 
dividuals. The brother in law of the president of 
this railroad company was Mr. Lincoln's Secre- 
tary of War." 

Sec. - 58. Gideon Welles. — The Secretary of the 
Navy under Lincoln, Gideon Welles pursued 
methods similar to those adopted by Mr. Cameron 
and of him the Congressional Committee say "It 
would seem natural and reasonable that vessels 
to be purchased should be fitted for the use they 
were to be put to. The arms to be bought should 
have been such as could be of service. And it was 
very clear that the men, of all others, who would 
be the best judges of what was needed by the two 
branches of the service in the way of ships and 
arms would be the officers of the navy and army. 
And the officers of the navy, in the beginning, had 
nothing else on which they could be well employed 
except these very purchases. For we had no ves- 



144 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

sels for them to command. For some reason, how- 
ever, best known to the men who conducted the 
affairs of the country at the time, the political 
friends of Congressmen and cabinet members were 
found, of all men in the United States, to be the 
only ones having the needed skill and knowledge 
which fitted them to make purchases for the gov- 
ernment. 

"The purchasing of vessels for the Navy Depart- 
ment at the port of New York was taken from the 
Commandant of the Navy-Yard there, and trans- 
ferred to a man of whom a House of Representa- 
tives Committee says that he had 'never had the 
slightest experience in the new and responsible 
duties which he was called upon to discharge, 
either in the naval service, the building or buy- 
ing and selling of ships, or in any pursuit calling 
for a knowledge of their construction, capacity, 
or value, never having spent an hour in either.' " 
The committee further say that "The evidence 
was abundant before the committee, that if it 
had been necessary to obtain the services of any 
gentleman outside of the navy itself, those gentle- 
men, combining from experience and education 
the knowledge most calculated to fit them for 
this duty, independent of outside aid, could have 
been secured without the slightest difficulty for a 
salary not exceeding $5,000 for the year." 

The Committee say of this purchasing agent 
that he "received as compensation during the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 145 

period of seven weeks previous to the 6th day of 
September, when this testimony was taken, the 
enormous sum of $51,584, as admitted by himself 
before the committee. When this testimony was 
taken, information of its extraordinary character 
and import was communicated to the department, 
in the hope that an abuse so glaring, when pointed 
out, might be corrected. Yet, notwithstanding 
the department became thus possessed of the in- 
formation that its own agent was, by this system 
of commissions, amassing a private fortune, the 
committee have been surprised to learn, from a 
recent communication from the Navy Department 
furnishing them with the numbers and prices of 
vessels purchased by Mr. Morgan for the Govern- 
ment since said 6th day of September, that the 
cost of those thus purchased by him amounts in 
the aggregate to the sum of $1,736,992. If he had 
received the same rate of compensation since as 
before that date, there must be added to the sum 
of $51,584 paid him before that date the further 
compensation of $43,424 for services rendered 
since, making in all the sum of $95,008 paid to a 
single individual for his services as agent of the 
Government since the 15th day of July, a period 
of four and one-half months." And the committee 
add: "The committee do not find in the transac- 
tion the less to censure in the fact that this ar- 
rangement between the Secretary of the Navy and 
Mr. Morgan was between brothers in law." 



146 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 59. Belknap. — Though not more corrupt 
than Cameron, W. W. Belknap who held the same 
office, Secretary of War fifteen years later, was im- 
peached by the House of Kepresentatives for sell- 
ing a place of post trader and to escape punish- 
ment, he resigned his office. The Senate, however, 
did not dismiss the charge but examined the evi- 
dence and declared by a vote of thirty-five to 
eighteen that he was guilty, several of the minor- 
ity declaring that they voted not guilty merely 
because by his resignation, he had taken himself 
out of the jurisdiction of the court. The case was 
made the subject of editorial comment by the 
leading newspapers of London. The Times ob- 
served that "This event is more grave because it 
is confirmatory of suspicions which have long pre- 
vailed among the American public. The reputa- 
tion of the official world has not of late years been 
so high as is desirable in a model republic." The 
Telegraph, which stood by the Union and was its 
most efficient British journalistic advocate dur- 
ing the civil war, admitted that such events "have 
produced and are producing that sinister opinion 
abroad about the national morality in the States 
to which no country however great can remain in- 
different." The News, another journalistic friend 
of the American people, remarked that "The 
vicious system on which the civil service of the 
United States had been based and continued, in 
spite of numerous warnings and the teachings of 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 147 

the wisest statesmen, was seen by all eyes to be 
bearing its poisonous fruits with remarkable fer- 
tility." The Standard, never very friendly to 
Brother Jonathan, gratified its feeling by saying, 
"Happily the countries are few where so gross an 
abuse of trust as appears to have just been con- 
fessed by the United States Secretary for War 
would be possible. That the public service of the 
United States is worm-eaten by corruption, that 
men are put into office for party considerations, 
and use their powers to enrich themselves, and 
that political life has degenerated into a mere 
scramble for the spoils of victory, all these things 
are notorious." 

The Contemporary Review not referring to the 
Belknap case said (XL, 634.) "Flagrant dishon- 
esty has prevailed in the United States, extending 
through all grades of the public service from 
weighers and gaugers to cabinet ministers and 
members of Congress." 

Sec. 60. Sanborn. — A contract, for the collection 
of certain delinquent internal revenue taxes, 
given in Grant's first presidential term, to John 
D. Sanborn, caused a great public scandal. It 
diverted business from the Commissioner of In- 
ternal Kevenue, to whose department it properly 
belonged, and paid extravagant percentages to an 
outsider. The Commissioner addressed a protest 
to the Secretary of the Treasury but obtained no 
reply, though the Secretary had previously ad- 



148 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

vised the repeal of a law permitting such con- 
tracts. The matter got into the newspapers and 
then there was a congressional investigation. The 
Secretary and Assistant Secretary testified that 
they knew nothing of the contract except that 
they had signed under the advice of the Solicitor 
of the Treasury; the Solicitor testified that he had 
prepared the contract under the direction of his 
superior officers. The responsibility was not fixed 
on any one person, and the President, instead of 
insisting as he should have done, on turning out 
somebody, took no decisive action. In Bolles (429) 
the reader may find details and references to au- 
thorities. 

Sec. 61. New York Customs. — In 1863, Mr. Jor- 
dan, the solicitor of the treasury, investigated 
the frauds committed against the government by 
the officers of the custom-house in New York, and 
in his report as quoted by Bolles (II, 519) he said: 
"As to the accessibility of many of those employed 
in the custom-house to corrupt influences, the evi- 
dence is conclusive and startling. . . . The state- 
ments herewith submitted seem to justify the be- 
lief that nearly the entire body of subordinate of- 
ficers, in and about the custom-house are, in one 
way or another, in the habitual receipt of emolu- 
ments from importers or their agents. One law- 
yer declares that he has paid to a single record 
clerk the sum of $1800 within a period of fifteen 
months. Entries from the books of an import- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 149 

ing house, doing but a moderate business, are dis- 
covered, showing that about f 1000 had been paid 
by it to an examiner within a period of a year. 
It is shown that a bond clerk, with a salary of 
flOOO per annum, enters upon a term of eight 
years with nothing, and leaves it with a fortune 
of |30,000. A majority of the officials questioned 
on the subject by me, admit that they receive such 
emoluments to a greater or less amount." 

Wm. E. Dodge a prominent and reputable mer- 
chant of New York city gave the following testi- 
mony before a Congressional Committee in 1872 
(Report of N. Y. Custom House Investigation pp. 
45-47) "From the standard of character in the 
Custom-house, I would not take the average em- 
ployes into my store under any consideration, or 
trust them with my business at all. ... If char- 
acter and qualifications were the standard of em- 
ployes in the Custom-house that two-thirds of 
the number now paid by the Government would 
do all the business better than it is done now. . . . 
It cannot fail to be a charge on the commerce of 
New York to have its Custom-house a hospital for 
broken-down politicians. That is just what it is. 
There is no use in talking about it; that is just 
what it is. There are men there — hundreds of 
them — that I would not allow to come in my of- 
fice if they would come for nothing. I would not 
trust them in my store to have anything to do 
with my goods. They are broken-down politi- 



150 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

dans, skilled only in political manipulations. For 
rapidity and correctness in performing the busi- 
ness, and the intricate calculations necessary in 
the Custom-house, a man should learn and under- 
stand it and get the facilities. In our house we 
train men for particular branches of business and 
have clerks who have been at the same desk for 
twenty and thirty years. A man who has been in 
the Custom-house for ten years knows how to do 
the business, where to find the necessary papers, 
etc. In his place there comes a stupid, drunken, 
broken-down, swearing fellow, whom you have to 
tell how to do his business and show where to 
find the papers." 

The New York Custom-House, while under the 
control of Chester A. Arthur, afterwards Presi- 
dent of the United States, was subjected in 1877 
to an investigation of which John Sherman who 
was then Secretary of the Treasury writes thus in 
his Recollections (II, 678) "The investigation 
showed that ignorance and incapacity on the part 
of the employes were not confined to the survey- 
or's department, but were found in other branches 
of the service, — creating delays and mistakes, im- 
periling the safety of the revenue and the interests 
of importers, and bringing the service into re- 
proach. It was intimated by chiefs of depart- 
ments that men were sent to them without brains 
enough to do the work, and that some of those 
appointed to perform the delicate duties of the ap- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 151 

praiser's office, requiring the special qualities of 
an expert, were better fitted to hoe and to plow. 
Some employes were incapacitated by age, some 
by ignorance, some by carelessness and indiffer- 
ence, and parties thus unfitted have been ap- 
pointed, not to perform routine duties distinctly 
marked, but to exercise a discretion in questions 
demanding intelligence and integrity, and involv- 
ing a large amount of revenue. 

"The evidence shows a degree and extent of 
carelessness which we think should not be per- 
mitted to continue. This point was illustrated to 
some degree by the testimony of the chiefs of the 
appraiser's department, the important duties of 
which would certainly justify a reasonable exact- 
ness. The invoices, which are recorded in that 
office, and which are sent out to the different divi- 
sions to be passed upon and then returned to the 
chief clerk, are found to exhibit, on their return, 
errors on the part of the several divisions, — accord- 
ing to one witness, nearly eight hundred errors a 
month, — although the number by the appraiser 
was estimated at a less figure. A part of these 
errors may be assigned to a difference of opinion 
as to the classification of the goods; but fully one- 
half are attributed to carelessness. At the naval 
office it was stated that the balance in favor of 
the government, of the many and large errors 
which they discover in the custom-house accounts 
of the liquidation of vessels and statements of re- 



152 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

fund, amounts to about a million and a half of 
dollars per annum." 

Sec. 62. Senatorial Courtesy. — The judges, at- 
torneys and marshals of the federal courts, the 
collectors of customs and of internal revenue, the 
appraisers of imported merchandise, the superin- 
tendents of the mints, the registers and receivers 
of the land offices and the postmasters of the large 
cities hold their places by presidential appoint- 
ment and senatorial confirmation. The Senate 
having the power to defeat the presidential ap- 
pointment, has adopted the rule that all names, 
not acceptable to the administration senator of 
the state or district in which the office is situated, 
shall be rejected. That is they divide up these 
offices among their dependents. This is called 
the rule of Senatorial Courtesy, implying that it 
would be discourteous to a Senator of the admin- 
istration party to deprive him of the privilege of 
controlling the large federal offices in his territory. 
For similar reasons, the Congressmen claim the 
control of the appointments of the petty federal 
offices in their districts. The Presidents have 
found that the members of both legislative houses 
will not do the work necessary to the conduct of 
government business unless the control of the ap- 
pointments is given to them; and have submitted 
to the unavoidable evil, to which custom has given 
its sanction. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 153 

A remarkable illustration of this custom oc- 
curred about 1875. Some federal officials in 
Texas were found guilty of committing serious 
frauds and were dismissed by the head of the de- 
partment in Washington, and the President nom- 
inated other men to fill their places. The Texas 
Senator who had selected the thieves protested 
against their removal and demanded that con- 
firmation should be refused to the successors, and 
thus his friends should be restored to their places. 
The majority of the Senate, however, declared that 
the gentleman from Texas was overstraining the 
rule of senatorial courtesy, which did not go to 
the length of keeping thieves in office when the 
proof of their guilt was conclusive and notorious. 

As the Senator may designate important ap- 
pointments, so if he should fall into discredit with 
his party, his selections are in danger of being 
punished for his political offenses. Thus when 
Charles Sumner, though he continued to be an 
ardent republican, refused to follow President 
Grant in his wild scheme to annex San Domingo, 
he was punished by the removal of his friend John 
Lothrop Motley, the historian, from his place as 
Ambassador to Great Britain. 

The federal senatorship is attractive to some 
millionaires and bosses because of its large patron- 
age, its long term, its high political influence and 
the ease with which it can be acquired by the help 
of money or skill in partisan management. He 



154 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

who aspires to it is not compelled to make 
speeches, to solicit the votes of the multitude, or 
to ascend laboriously through subordinate offices. 
If he is the boss or has the purse, he can take the 
prize. 

Of late years the members of minority parties 
in the Senate have more patronage and plunder 
than in earlier times and McOonaghie (Congres- 
sional Committees 293) makes these remarks about 
the change: — "The key to these increased privi- 
leges of the minorities, and to this enlargement or 
inflation of the committee system by one-third, is 
the demand of individual Senators for quarters 
and clerical aid at public expense. This motive 
was avowed by Lyman Trumbull twenty-five years 
ago. When a select committee on woman's suf- 
frage was created, Dec. 16, 1881, Senators Vest 
and Morrill intimated that the covert object was 
a room and employes for a Senatorial lord of 
creation. 'What these gentlemen want, to come 
down to the real facts of the case' said Senator 
Morgan, 'is a convenient body servant, a man who 
will wait upon them in a quiet and excellent way. 
It is not for the public service, it is for private 
service, that we are voting these messengers, and 
for the accommodation of a few gentlemen.' The 
Senate refused to abolish the Committee on Kevo- 
lutionary Claims because its room belonged by 
custom to the minority caucus. In 1884 Senator 
Vest returned to the charge against 'the sinecure 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 155 

committees/ affirming that there were six which 
had 'never had a bill or a resolution or a particle 
of business before them.' At that time the But- 
ler House, rented annually for from twenty-five 
to thirty-five thousand dollars, was being used 
avowedly for committee meetings, really for in- 
dividual accomodation." 

Sec. 63. Spoils Legislation. — With Divided 
Sovereignty and Conflict of Departments, the 
Spoils System cooperates to demoralize our na- 
tional, provincial and municipal legislative bodies. 
By its rule of rotation, it prevents the retention 
of experienced men in office, repels the competent, 
and gives the places to those who have failed in 
other business. Thus it corrupts the public ser- 
vice and lays the foundation for numerous, vast 
and varied frauds. 

The members of Congress and of the state legis- 
latures number about 7000 in the aggregate, and 
of these probably one in twenty, is fit for his place; 
as many others should be in the chain gang; and 
the majority are incompetents. The number of 
statutes enacted in the average year is at least 
7000 or more than thirty times as many as the 
British Parliament enacts for a population four 
fold larger. 

Sec. 64. Judicial Abuses. — Many causes contrib- 
ute to make our administration of justice slow, 
costly and inefficient. There is a lack of harmony 
in the federal and state methods of procedure; and 



156 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

in many cases, the jurisdictions overlap or conflict. 
Most of the judges hold for brief terms, get small 
salaries and obtain their places by popular elec- 
tion and by playing the demagogue. The deci- 
sions rendered by unfit judges and the statutes 
enacted by unfit lawmakers favor the prolonga- 
tion, and the complication of litigation by post- 
ponements, rehearings, new trials, appeals, and 
technicalities far beyond example in any other 
country, civilized or uncivilized. Oases that would 
be dispatched within a few months in Great Brit- 
ain here drag along for years. Criminal proceed- 
ings are especially slow and vexatious, as if the 
laws had been devised for the purpose of exhaust- 
ing the witnesses for the prosecution and enabling 
the attorneys for the defense to draw the last dol- 
lar from the criminal and his family. It often hap- 
pens that murderers of whose guilt the proof is 
overwhelming, are tried repeatedly with a verdict 
of guilty every time, before punishment is inflict- 
ed; and there is one case on record, of five trials in 
the court of original jurisdiction before an able, 
learned and honest judge, and four trials on ap- 
peal, in the state Supreme Court, before the vil- 
lain's neck was stretched. Although our criminal 
law closely resembles that of England in most of 
its provisions, many changes have been made for 
the apparent purpose of increasing the work, the 
importance and the incomes of the lawyers. An 
average lawsuit, civil or criminal, lasts about four 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 157 

times as long and costs four times as much as in 
England. 

Most of the judges, federal as well as state, ob- 
tain their places by zealous partisan service, and 
sometimes, as a condition of nomination, must 
pledge themselves to platforms declaring in favor 
of certain interpretations of the constitutions and 
laws, thus promising to render partisan decisions 
after reaching the bench. Peter H. Burnett, at 
one time chief justice of California, said (American 
Theory of Government, 63) that in such a case the 
judge might properly address the lawyer, "on the 
other side/' on these terms "I cannot hear argu- 
ment upon this question, because it would be idle 
to do so. I have pledged myself in advance, to my 
constituents, to decide the question against you 
and I must keep my pledge to them though it may 
be true that you are in the right and could plainly 
make it appear. But as the matter now stands, 
this court does not in fact, decide cases itself but 
simply records the judgments of public opinion 
for the time being. I am sorry for you and your 
client but I love myself better than I love the law 
of this case, and I could not have been elected 
unless I had made the pledge I did and I was 
bound to be elected." 

The high technicality, delay, expense and un- 
certainty of our criminal courts are largely to 
blame for the frequency of lynching. The expense 
of punishing a villain by a court is great and by a 



158 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

mob, small. In 1890, perhaps an average year, 
132 persons were executed under judicial sentence 
and 190 by mob law in the United States; and not 
one in Great Britain, France, or Germany. Thou- 
sands of persons participated in these lynch mur- 
ders; not one was legally punished. The Ameri- 
cans brag they are "a law abiding people!" 

Sec. 65. Cities. — Dr. Albert Shaw who has made 
a study of municipal characters and is a high au- 
thority on the subject says that those in the 
United States are "the very worst in the world." 
He might have added that as a natural conse- 
quence of this defective legislation, the municipal 
administrations in our country are, as a class, in- 
ferior in competency, efficiency, economy and in- 
tegrity to those of every other enlightened country. 
The Commissioners appointed by the State of New 
York in 1876 to investigate the affairs of its chief 
city declared that more than half the total amount 
of city debts in the United States then outstand- 
ing had been contracted as the result of official 
fraud. Whether there has been any notable im- 
provement in such matters since 1876 is doubtful. 
The municipal officers in three-fourths of the large 
cities are generally unfit for their places; and un- 
der a sound political system the city work could 
be done better and at half the expense by half the 
number of men. 

The condition of things in some American cities 
is such says G. W. Hosmer (The People and Politics, 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 159 

264) that "whatever way the people vote, they can 
only choose between alternative conspiracies of 
adventurers when they have little more control in 
their politics than they have in the choice of the 
Emperor of China and where the government is 
literally and absolutely in the hands of an 
oligarchy of nimble-witted thieves." 

Under many administrations, the governments 
of New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, St. Louis, 
San Francisco, Baltimore, Cincinnati and Cleve- 
land have been corrupt beyond any example re- 
corded in the municipal history of other countries. 
Two of the great criminals, W. M. Tweed of New 
York and Henry Meiggs of San Francisco achieved 
world-wide notoriety; scores of other equally base 
but of inferior capacity, lived and died in relative 
obscurity. 

The North American Review of October 1866 said 
"we have undertaken to write something about 
the government of the city of New York and we 
have fallen into a discourse upon stealing." The 
same periodical in July 1867 lamented that "The 
disgraceful character of the municipal govern- 
ment of New York is notorious. The absolute ex- 
clusion of all honest men from any practical con- 
trol of affairs in that city and the supremacy in the 
Common Council of pick-pockets, prize-fighters, 
emigrant runners, pimps and the lowest class of 
liquor dealers are facts which admit of no ques- 
tion." Mr. Bannatyne a lawyer of that city in 



160 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

a book published in 1887 said that "in this year's 
board of aldermen . . . there are five liquor deal- 
ers, eighteen political workers and one honest 
man." A New York Commission with W. M. 
Evarts at its head, to investigate municipal abuses 
reported in 1876 that the principal cities of the 
state had been afflicted by "elaborate systems of 
depredation" which passed "under the name of city 
governments." In its number for May 1899 the 
Review of Reviews informs its readers that "Chi- 
cago aldermen were bought by the street railroad 
magnates as if they had been so many cattle." 
Bryce (I, 516) observes that the officials of New 
York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago and San 
Francisco have not only plundered the city tax- 
payers outrageously but have done their best to 
corrupt the legislatures of their respective states. 
In 1848 a society of citizens organized to correct 
some of the governmental abuses in New York 
City, called the Council of Political Reform, pub- 
lished an appeal to the people in which among 
other things it said "The active political classes of 
the City are found chiefly among its adventurers, 
idlers and criminals, uneducated, and without 
either moral or patriotic convictions. If left to 
themselves these classes will succeed in giving 
their own character to the administration of the 
government, and in electing men of their own 
stamp to office; men who are champions and ex- 
ponents of the very class against which society is 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 161 

organized to protect itself. This fact is strikingly 
illustrated in the character of the most of men 
who, till within two years, held office in this City. 
These men made it their study and effort to per- 
vert the best provisions of law, to circumvent the 
most carefully considered safeguards of the pub- 
lic interests, to screen criminals, and to commit 
and cover up frauds upon the Treasury of such 
proportions and audacity as astounded the world. 
They administered their offices very much as a 
gambler plays his cards, solely with the view to 
make all the money out of the people they could, 
and keep out of jail. The appointed guardians of 
the public peace were often the very class from 
whom every good interest had most to apprehend, 
and against whom there was most need of protec- 
tion." 

Sec. 66. A. D. White.— "Without the slightest 
exaggeration we may assert" says Andrew D. 
White (Forum, 1890, 357) "that, with very few ex- 
ceptions, the city governments of the United 
States are the worst in Christendom, — the most 
expensive, the most inefficient, and the most cor- 
rupt. No one who has any considerable knowl- 
edge of our own country and of other countries 
can deny this. 

"Among our greater municipalities, we natu- 
rally look first at New York and Philadelphia. 
Both are admirably situated; each stands on ris- 
ing ground with water on both sides; each is hap- 



162 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

py in position, in climate in all advantages to be 
desired by a great metropolis. In each, what is 
done by individuals is generally well done and 
sometimes splendidly done; and in each, what is 
due from the corporate authorities, in matters 
most essential to a proper city government, is 
either wretchedly done or left utterly undone. 
One has but to walk along the streets of these and 
other great American cities, to notice at once that 
some evil principle is at work. Every where are 
wretched wharves, foul docks, inadequate streets, 
and inefficient systems of sewerage, paving, and 
lighting. Pavements which were fairly good at 
the beginning, have been replaced with utter care- 
lessness, and have been prematurely worn out or 
ruined. The stranger, seeking to find his way in 
the first of these great cities, is guided by few 
signs giving the names of streets; in the most fre- 
quented quarters there are generally none at all. 
Obstacles of all sorts are allowed; tangled net- 
works of wires frequently exist in such masses 
overhead as to prevent access to buildings in case 
of fire, and almost to cut off the rays of the sun. 
Here and there corporations or private persons 
have been allowed to use the streets in such man- 
ner as to close them to the general public. In wet 
weather many of the most important thorough- 
fares are covered with reeking mud; in dry 
weather this mud, reduced to an impalpable dust 
containing the germs of almost every disease, is 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 153 

blown into the houses and into the nostrils of the 
citizens. 

"The city halls of these larger towns are the 
acknowledged centers of the vilest corruption. 
They are absolutely demoralizing, not merely to 
those who live under their sway, but to the 
country at large. Such cities, like the decaying 
spots on ripe fruit, tend to corrupt the whole body 
politic. As a rule, the men who sit in the coun- 
cils of our larger cities, dispensing comfort or dis- 
comfort, justice or injustice, beauty or deformity, 
health or disease, to this and to future generations, 
are men who in no other country would think of 
aspiring to such positions. Some of them, indeed, 
would think themselves lucky in keeping outside 
of the prisons. Officials intrusted with the ex- 
penditure of the vast wealth of our citizens are 
frequently men whom no one would think of en- 
trusting with the management of his private af- 
fairs, or, indeed, of employing in any capacity. 
Few have gained their positions by fitness or by 
public service; many have gained them by scoun- 
drelism some by crime." 

Sec. 67. Ttreed— Between 1866 and 1871 the city 
of New York was under the rule of Tweed and his 
associates who obtaiDed at least $30,000,000 by 
fraud, and a large additional sum by wasteful 
management that was perhaps chargeable rather 
to incompetence and carelessness than to inten- 
tional dishonesty. Several leading newspapers 



164 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

of the city were pleased or bribed by advertise- 
ments for which $1,000,000 were paid annually 
from the municipal treasury and most of them had 
nothing to say against the embezzlers until after 
their share of the plunder had been cut off. The 
main facts of these frauds are well told in a chap- 
ter of Bryce's American Commonwealth. Tweed 
was convicted of fraud but never properly pun- 
ished. 

An interesting feature, of this glorious achieve- 
ment of the Spoils System, was the passage of a 
statute by the New York legislature, under 
Tweed's dictation, authorizing the City Comp- 
troller, the accomplice of the great Boss, to audit 
and pay claims against the city with money to be 
derived from bonds. The claims thus audited 
amounted to $12,500,000, and of this amount sixty- 
five per cent or $8,125,000 was divided among five 
members of the King, Tweed taking twenty-five 
per cent of the whole amount or $3,125,000. If 
the effete monarchies of Europe can show any 
municipal financiering equal to that, let them trot 
it out. 

In 1882, John A. Dix who had been federal 
senator and governor of New York, in a public 
address (Memoirs, II. 401) said "It is difficult to 
fancy a more heinous crime, except the willful de- 
struction of human life, than that committed by 
the leader of the corrupt combination by which 
this city [of New York] was plundered of $20,- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 165 

000,000 through a deliberate and systematic 
scheme of fraud extending through a period of 
years; and yet, before he was shut up (it cannot 
be said imprisoned) six months of the twelve 
years to which he was sentenced, he was the sub- 
ject, as he is still, of a somewhat extended sym- 
pathy. A portion of the public press contributed 
to this morbid and misplaced tenderness of feel- 
ing. One said his custodians were denounced be- 
cause they allowed him to use his cottage furni- 
ture; another, when it was alleged that he was 
exempted from the usual rigors in our system of 
prison discipline to which no criminal ought to 
be subjected; and a third suggested that it would 
be a merciful act to pardon the old man and let 
him go. Now, I believe it may be truly said that 
he was never imprisoned in strict accordance with 
the sentence of the court by which he was con- 
victed, or in the sense in which other criminals, 
who have committed, by comparison, the most in- 
significant offenses, undergo their sentences. 
The typical divinity who presides over the admin- 
istration of public justice is always represented 
as blindfolded. If her bandage had been taken 
off at Blackwell's Island [where Tweed was im- 
prisoned nominally] she would have witnessed 
what has never been seen before in the history of 
criminal jurisprudence — a convict who was al- 
lowed a private secretary to help him take care 
of his plunder . . . His escape from custody and 



166 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

the indulgences extended to him during his de- 
tention, constitute the most disgraceful chapter 
in the history of the State, for it cannot be 
doubted that they were procured by corrupting 
public officials." 

Sec. 68. San Francisco. — If report, generally 
credited by intelligent citizens at the time, was 
correct, the government of San Francisco during 
most of the years between 1880 and 1890 was di- 
rected by a boss who managed the primaries and 
conventions, distributed the nominations of his 
party, controlled the City Council and Board of 
Education, sold most of the fat offices and con- 
tracts, and in many cases exacted a monthly 
tribute from teachers in the city schools and 
clerks in municipal offices ranging from a tenth 
to a quarter of their salaries, under penalty of dis- 
missal in case of refusal. 

In the same city, a custom was maintained for 
many years that the assessor should have a profit 
from his office much larger than his salary and 
legitimate fees. He took advantage of the statu- 
tory clauses providing that citizens owning taxa- 
ble property should deliver a list of it to the as- 
sessor on the first day of March in each year, and 
that in case of refusal or neglect to do so, he 
might fix the amount arbitrarily. These clauses 
are not drawn wisely; and therefore are generally 
neglected. The thrifty assessor saw and used his 
opportunity to levy blackmail. He made extrav- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 167 

agant assessments of the stocks of many mer- 
chants, — especially of aliens, unpopular men, and 
persons of no influence in his party, — and then 
sent a note to each, stating the amount and an- 
nouncing that he would be in his office at a cer- 
tain hour on a certain day, to hear objections if 
there were any to his action. The victim went to 
see the assessor, found that he was alone with 
him, and that he could have the figure reduced to 
a reasonable amount if he would pay one hundred 
dollars, f 1,000, or f 5,000 according to circumstan- 
ces. Many of the victims told one another how 
they had been fleeced, but each had been fleeced 
separately, and the law left them without remedy. 
Eudyard Kipling was in San Francisco once and 
wrote some of his experiences in his book From 
Sea to Sea. He says (II 3) "I went ... to a 
saloon where gentlemen interested in ward poli- 
tics nightly congregate. They were not pretty 
persons. Some of them were bloated, and they 
all swore cheerfully till the heavy gold watch- 
chains on their fat stomachs rose and fell again; 
but they talked over their liquor as men who had 
power and unquestioned access to places of 
trust and profit. . . . They banged their fists on 
the table and spoke of political 'pulls,' the vend- 
ing of votes and so forth. Theirs was not the talk 
of village babblers reconstructing the affairs of 
the nation but of strong, coarse, lustful men fight- 
ing for spoil and thoroughly understanding the 



168 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

best methods of reaching it. . . . Then I began to 
understand why my pleasant and well-educated 
hosts in San Francisco spoke with a bitter scorn 
of such duties of citizenship as voting and taking 
an interest in the distribution of offices. Scores 
of men have told me with no false pride that 
they would as soon concern themselves with the 
public affairs of the city or state as rake muck." 

Sec. 69. Cincinnati. — The following exposition 
of the political condition of Cincinnati, in 1892 
deserves full credence because it was written by 
John Sherman, a man of high official position, fed- 
eral Senator from Ohio for many years and Secre- 
tary of the Treasury for eight years, of high char- 
acter, who had the best opportunity for knowing 
the facts and who, years after writing them, pub- 
lished them in his Recollections (II 1158). 

"As I understand, the substantial control of all 
local Republican appointments, and nominations 
to public offices or employments of every grade in 
Hamilton county, is practically in one man; that 
it is rare that anyone can secure any place on the 
Republican ticket, from judge of the highest court 
in your county, to the least important office, with- 
out his consent, and this consent is secured in 
most cases by the payment of a specific sum of 
money; that the money so collected is appor- 
tioned between the 'boss' and what is called the 
'gang,' and used to control the primaries for the 
election of delegates to your county, state, and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 169 

congressional conventions; and that when any 
office carries with it patronage it is made the ex- 
press and implied condition in the nomination of 
the candidate that this patronage must be trans- 
ferred to the boss. 

"I understand also that the appointments made 
by your local boards, and even by some federal 
offices, are in effect transferred to the same per- 
son to whom applicants are sent and whose recom- 
mendation decides the appointment, so that one 
man controls by corrupt methods nearly all the 
nominations and appointments in Hamilton 
county, and this rule is only tempered by occa- 
sional respect to public opinion, when the boss 
thinks it unsafe to disregard it. These methods 
were strikingly exemplified in the last county con- 
vention, when a decided majority of a delegation 
of ten representatives and three senators were 
nominated for the Ohio legislature, pledged be- 
forehand to vote for the person to be designated 
by the boss when the time came for the election 
of the Senator of the United States. His decision 
was carefully withheld until the election was over 
and was then announced. In this way the vote 
for United States Senator of the most populous 
city and county in Ohio was, during the canvass, 
held, as I believe, for sale, not by the persons 
nominated as Senators and Representatives, who 
are highly reputable citizens, but by a corrupt or- 
ganization which was able to control the nomi- 



170 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

nations and practically to exercise the power to 
vote for United States Senator intrusted to its 
nominees." 

Sec. 70. Scale of Infamy, — In proportions as the 
amount of political business done in a state or 
city is large and complicated, as its voters include 
many ignorant foreigners, as its officials are 
numerous, as their terms are short, and their re- 
sponsibility for abuses is divided in those propor- 
tions approximately, extravagance and corrup- 
tion prevail. The county is worse than the town- 
ship, the Union worse than the county; the state 
worse than the Union; and the large city worst of 
all. 

Sec. 71. Unfit Presidents. — Most of our presi- 
dents were unfit for their places. 

Jefferson wrote the Kentucky resolutions of 
1798 declaring that the Union is a compact of the 
States, each of which has a right to judge for it- 
self of infractions of the compact and of "the 
mode of redress," and as nullification and seces- 
sion are possible modes of redress, both are justi- 
fied by these resolutions; which were adopted by 
the people when they elected him to the presi- 
dency knowing that he was the advocate of the 
resolutions. His unconstitutional and injudi- 
cious embargo inflicted great loss on New Eng- 
land and made the federal authority odious to 
many citizens. His false and malignant char- 
acter has been concealed in most of our history 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 171 

but is partly exposed in Morse's Life of Alex- 
ander Hamilton, and in Hoist's Constitutional His- 
tory. 

Acting in concert with Jefferson, Madison wrote 
the "state rights" resolutions adopted by the 
legislature of Virginia in 1799; so he too was 
a secessionist and unfit for the presidency. He 
declared war against Great Britain long after he 
should have declared it and, because of his delay, 
came out disgracefully, getting no redress for the 
great wrong that had been done to American 
mariners. 

Monroe was a partisan of Jefferson and Madi- 
son and, like them, a secessionist. 

Andrew Jackson, a man of narrow mind and in- 
tense prejudices, was easily managed by base men 
who knew how to take advantage of his weak- 
nesses. By vetoing the bill to renew the charter 
of the National bank, he threw the currency of 
the country into most disastrous confusion. 
Though he accepted the State Eights resolutions 
of 1798 and 1799 and therefore was a secessionist, 
he bitterly denounced Calhoun's plan of nullifica- 
tion; but he signed the second Compromise bill 
which granted the substance of South Carolina's 
demand. He did more than any other man to in- 
troduce the Spoils System into federal office and 
thus corrupt our government. He refused to en- 
force the judgment of the federal Supreme Court; 
against the state of Georgia and thus practically 



172 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

applied the State Eights doctrine in federal rela- 
tions. He owed his election to the fact that he 
won the battle of New Orleans more by luck than 
by generalship. 

Martin Van Buren obtained the presidency be- 
cause he was one of Jackson's most assiduous 
sycophants. 

Wm. H. Harrison was nominated because he 
had defeated undisciplined and poorly-armed 
Indians in two battles, and because he had no 
prominent political record; and also because 
Jackson's blundering financial measures had 
thrown the business of the country into confusion. 

Polk was a secessionist, a demagogue and a 
man of ordinary capacity. Hoist (II, 533) gives 
a clear account of his discreditable conduct in the 
presidency. 

Zachary Taylor was unfit for his place, elected 
because he was a military hero. 

Franklin Pierce was elected on a platform 
which explicitly accepted the resolutions of 1798 
and 1799, the purpose of the acceptance being to 
prepare the way for a practical secession. In his 
term the Missouri Compromise was repealed for 
the purpose of legalizing slavery in all the terri- 
tories. 

James Buchanan was elected on a platform re- 
affirming the resolutions of 1798 and 1799; and in 
the last months of his term, he not only refused 
to obstruct the secession of the Southern Confed- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 173 

eracy but allowed a member of his cabinet to re- 
tain his place while he went to Raleigh to urge 
the legislature of North Carolina to secede from 
the Union. 

The last of our presidents grossly unfit for his 
office was Ulysses S. Grant. The accounts of his 
political blindness may be read in the orations of 
Charles Sumner (XIV. 102, XV. 85) and the rec- 
ords of the trials of Belknap and Babcock. 

Secessionist principles were approved by twelve 
presidential elections, twice each for Jefferson, 
Madison, Monroe, and Jackson, and once each for 
Van Buren, Polk, Pierce and Buchanan; yet the 
South was overwhelmed with fire, blood, confisca- 
tion and carpet-bag oppression because she under- 
took to act on the principles which the majority 
of the Northern States had repeatedly accepted 
in the presidential elections. Under our partisan 
system no declaration of the popular will can be 
trusted. The control of the platforms is in the 
hands of professional politicians who have no 
conscience. 

The following story, which came to me from a 
source entitled to much credit, deserves a place 
here. Late one evening, not more than thirty, nor 
less than fifteen, years ago, a distinguished lobby- 
ist, familiar in the highest official circle of Wash- 
ington, — I style him Mr. Slick, — visited a distin- 
guished millionaire, — whom I will style Mr. R. R. 
Prince, — and said he had come with a message 



174 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

from the President of the United States, who was 
then at a gambling house, at such a number, in 
such a street, that he must have $10,000 without 
delay. Mr. Prince said that the President was a 
cursed fool to send such a message to him, but he 
Mr. Prince would like to have a chat with Mr. 
Slick over a glass of whiskey in his dining room. 
While ordering his refreshment, he secretly called 
for a carriage, to be ready at a side door, then sat 
down with his guest, until he had a signal that the 
vehicle was ready, when he begged to be excused 
for a little while on account of urgent business, 
drove rapidly to the gambling house, found the 
President there, took him into a room where they 
were alone, learned that Slick's message was au- 
thorized, and after warning the President never to 
do things in that way, with him again, gave the 
|10,000 in large bills without a receipt, and then 
hurried away, for he detested gambling houses. 

The three personages mentioned in this story 
are all dead. I knew Mr. Prince and Mr. Slick 
personally, and the parts attributed to them, are 
in keeping with their reputations, with my con- 
ception of their character and with the rela- 
tions between them as represented by current 
rumor. 

The political managers accuse the plutocrats of 
corrupting our high officials, who however are in- 
curably corrupt before they obtain positions of 
much influence and, after obtaining them, levy 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 175 

black-mail systematically on all the great capital- 
ists whose property is exposed to their depreda- 
tions. In our political life, the boss and the cor- 
poration play the parts which were acted by the 
wolf and the lamb in ^Esop's fable. 

Sec. 72. Presidential Candidates. — Financial ca- 
pacity one of the greatest needs of the govern- 
ment has never counted for much in a national 
convention, because it is shown only in financial 
reforms which disturb abuses, make enemies and 
cost votes. By his services in drafting the resump- 
tion act of 1875 while in the Senate, and after- 
wards in resuming specie payment as Secretary 
of the Treasury, John Sherman deserved but did 
not get the presidency. Robert J. Walker and 
Hugh McCullough were able financiers, more 
competent to be at the head of the government 
than the men under whom they were secretaries. 
Other able financiers like Hamilton and Gallatin 
were favorites with the educated few but not 
with the multitude and therefore were not avail- 
able. 

The characteristics of many presidential candi- 
dates and the influences that controlled their 
nomination, imply that neither eminent states- 
manship, nor legal learning, nor oratorical genius, 
nor experience in high political office is an indis- 
pensable qualification. The most available per- 
son is the one who is the most popular with the 
ignorant class of people. Without the informa- 



176 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

tion or the discriminating judgment needed to 
measure the relative merits of the candidates, the 
multitude follow their impressions and prefer the 
man who has done something to please and noth- 
ing to offend them, whose name and character 
have become familiar to them, and has been 
painted to them, perhaps most erroneously, as a 
heroic personage. They may elect relatively ob- 
scure men like Polk, Pierce, Lincoln and Hayes 
and reject men long eminent as successful and 
favorite congressional leaders like Olay, Webster, 
Douglas, Seward and Blaine. In their tribunal 
several petty mistakes will outweigh a multitude 
of great public services; and for this reason a 
long and prominent official record is more harm- 
ful than helpful to a candidate. 

From 1832 to 1896 inclusive there were seven- 
teen presidential elections with twice as many 
leading candidates, among whom twelve had been 
generals in war, and owed their nominations 
mainly to that fact. These were Jackson, Wm. 
H. Harrison, Taylor, Pierce, Scott, McGlellan, 
Grant (twice), Hayes, Hancock, and Benjamin 
Harrison twice. Garfield is not counted because 
he was a leader in Congress as well as a general 
in the army. If, however, he had not distin- 
guished himself in the war, he would probably 
never have risen to a position of political prom- 
inence. Of these twelve military candidacies, ten 
were successful. Fremont might be added to the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 177 

list; for though he had not been a general, when 
nominated for president, he owed his nomination 
to his reputation made while in the army. 

In these seventeen national campaigns, men, 
who had previously held leading positions in Con- 
gress, were seven times candidates, including 
Clay (three times), Cass, Buchanan, Douglas; and 
Blaine. Of these none save Buchanan reached the 
presidency. Webster, Calhoun and Seward, 
other very eminent politicians, could not obtain 
nominations. Our political system requires that 
we should have a war once in twenty years, with 
some weak nation, so that we may have a regular 
supply of victorious generals for presidential nom- 
inees. 

Sec. 73. Purity Promises. — The Republican 
Party in its national platform of 1872 declared 
that "we therefore favor a reform of the system 
of laws which shall abolish the evils of patronage 
and make honesty, efficiency, and fidelity the es- 
sential qualifications for public positions, without 
practically creating a life tenure of office." The 
Democratic Party in its national platform of the 
same year said that "We therefore regard a 
thorough reform of the civil service as one of the 
most pressing necessities of the hour; that hon- 
esty, capacity, and fidelity constitute the only 
valid claims to public employment; that the 
offices of the Government cease to be a matter 
of arbitrary favoritism and patronage, and 



178 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

that public station shall become again a post 
of honor. To this end it is imperatively re- 
quired that no President shall be a candidate 
for reelection." Many state conventions of 
each party repeated these pretenses of zeal for 
the purification of the Government. In 1871 
the Illinois Democrats and the Republicans in 
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio and 
Wisconsin, and the Democrats in New York, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and in 1872 the Re- 
publicans in Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, 
Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New 
York, and Tennessee, and the Democrats in Con- 
necticut, New York, North Carolina, Pennsyl- 
vania and Texas, all confessed the corruption and 
demanded the remedy. 

That these denunciations of the spoils system 
were insincere and were made for the sole purpose 
of catching votes is evident from the facts that 
the professional politicians, who control all the 
national and state conventions of both the great 
parties, have been and still are bitter enemies of 
civil service reform; that they have not given 
their explicit approval of its extension; and that 
they have not used their influence to introduce it 
into the administrative offices of the States, 
counties, and cities under their control. 

The Congressional Committee on Civil Service 
in a report made in 1874 said: "There had been 
developed, mainly within a single generation, and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 179 

was existing with fearful powers of expansion 
and reproduction, an aggressive and unscrupu- 
lous spirit of mercenary partisanship, which, pro- 
moting and dominating the pursuit of politics as 
a trade, and seeking public office and party and 
caucus leadership principally for the spoils of 
money and patronage they could command, was 
degrading all party action in popular estimation 
and impairing alike official integrity, political 
honor, and private morality. This spirit de- 
veloped and animated all over the country large 
numbers of little and great partisan combinations, 
faithful to no party principles, inspired by no pa- 
triotic sentiments, conducting no useful debates, 
contributing nothing to public intelligence or pub- 
lic virtue, but meddlesome and insatiable, every- 
where, whenever any official selection was to be 
made or any official authority was to be exercised. 
More frequently obstructing, or basely condition- 
ing, than aiding, the large and legitimate move- 
ments of the parties, — acting as the henchmen of 
local aspirants and the retainers of unscrupulous 
men of fortune, rather than as the friends of 
statesmen and the advocates of principles, — the 
active members of these organizations were be- 
coming, especially in the larger cities, the banditti 
of politics and the pawnbrokers of patronage, by 
whom many honest and intelligent members of all 
the great parties were kept out of public posi- 
tions and thousands of worthy voters were dis- 



180 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

couraged from going to the polls. . . . When, for 
example, in 1868, Congress sought information of 
the abuses in the Departments, a member de- 
clared, in a speech in the House, that 'nothing im- 
pressed me more with the rottenness and corrup- 
tion of our present want of system than the tears 
of those old and faithful servants, who begged 
that they might not be placed on record as wit- 
nesses of the faithlessness of their associates, and 
that it might not be known that they had been 
called as witnesses. Nothing but the assurance 
of secrecy could procure us evidence of how the 
people were being plundered.' ... It would be 
easy to show that it has caused great numbers of 
needless officials and employes to be foisted upon 
state and city treasuries, and has been the main 
cause of those alarming spoliations of State and 
municipal funds which have so often shocked and 
alarmed the country. In some particulars, in- 
deed, the abuses in these quarters seem to have 
been greater than in the civil service of the na- 
tion; for, since this report was begun, the judge 
at the head of an important court in a great city 
has stated to a member of this Commission that 
he has been compelled to resist, to the uttermost, 
a concerted attempt, by traders in politics in that 
city, to substitute their favorites for all the skill- 
ed and faithful officials of his court; and, but a 
short time since, the public journals of the city of 
New York contained a correspondence, beginning 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 181 

with a demand in writing from a similar source, 
upon a criminal judge of high jurisdiction, that he 
should at once give the favorites named from each 
of several wards in that city, official places in his 
court, though none were vacant." 

Sec. 74. Decline. — As the Spoils System has 
risen, the character of the government has fallen. 
From 1789 until 1829 the offices created by federal 
law were generally held during good behavior. 
There were no conventions, no direct participa- 
tion of the populace in presidential elections, no 
extravagant appropriations, no general recogni- 
tion of the spoils system. The degradation of the 
government began in 1829 when Andrew Jackson 
became President. In 1874 the Civil Service Com- 
mittee in the House of Representatives made a re- 
port in which it said, "Only those [officials] of 
merit were [in the early years of the Republic] 
nominated or confirmed, and no removals were 
made in the clerical force on account of mere 
opinions. During eight years, Washington re- 
moved but nine persons (except for cause); John 
Adams, during his term, removed but nine, and 
not one on account of opinions; Jefferson re- 
moved but thirty-nine; Madison only five; Mon- 
roe only nine; J. Q. Adams only two. These were 
officers confirmed by the Senate. Of what might 
be called the clerical force, not one was removed 
save for cause, until Andrew Jackson was elected, 
when the era of political proscription began, from 



182 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

which we are now recovering. For partisan rea- 
sons, that President removed nearly 2,000 persons 
in a single year. This was the inauguration of 
the spoils system. Perhaps no people were ever 
served by worthier officers and clerks than those 
who served the people of this country for nearly 
forty years after the adoption of the Constitution. 
Defalcations were but rarely known, and public 
opinion would not tolerate official delinquents in 
the country." 

Before 1828, the same general principles pre- 
vailed in the political affairs of most of the states 
as in those of the Union, and then the country 
laid the foundation for much of the prosperity 
which it has since enjoyed. The National Conven- 
tion, the platform adopted by the national con- 
vention, the primary election, the boss, rotation 
in office, the lobby, log-rolling, popular elections 
for judges and mayors, and the spoils system were 
either unknown or had little prominence. We 
have abandoned much of the political system 
which our grandfathers and great-grandfathers 
adopted. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 183 



CHAPTEE IV. 

PERIL. 

Section 75. Warnings. — The opinions of the 
number, magnitude and peril of our political de- 
fects, explained in the preceding chapter, are so 
different from those of many books by distin- 
guished authors, that the intelligent reader may 
wonder, why, if they are true, he should now meet 
them for the first time explained, in a manner, 
giving to them a most significant importance. 

After a little consideration he will not doubt 
their accuracy. They are accredited by the preci- 
sion of averment requisite in trustworthy docu- 
ments. They are strengthened by their consist- 
ency with one another; and they are proved by 
numerous witnesses of the highest character. 
Many of them are familiar by name to the reader. 
He knows something about the frequent threats 
of secession in Congress before 1861 and of the 
compromises adopted in the hope of terminating 
the turbulent agitation; he remembers the wide- 
spread and long-continued strike-rebellions; and 
he has not forgotten the vast and numerous cor- 
ruptions in the administrative and legislative de- 
partments of the Union, the states and the cities. 



184 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

These things, however, did not make much impres- 
sion on his mind, because some of their significant 
points were not brought out distinctly at the time 
of their occurrence and they were not brought to- 
gether. That long-neglected work was left for 
me to do. 

Intelligent Americans, who imagine that they 
have kept up with contemporaneous literature re- 
lating to our country, may be surprised to read 
here that distinguished statesmen and authors 
have not only predicted the collapse of our gov- 
ernment, but have even fixed a limit within which 
the catastrophe will probably begin. One men- 
tions 1910 as the year; another, 1925; a third, 
1930; a fourth, 1999; and others say the disaster 
may happen any day. The prophets, who give us 
these direful warnings, are not shallow alarmists, 
but are among the high political authorities of 
the XlXth century, and include James Bryce, 
Herman von Hoist, John Stuart Mill, T. B. Macau- 
lay, W. E. H. Lecky, Sheldon Amos, James Kent, 
James A. Garfield, George Wm. Curtis, Daniel 
Webster, Gamaliel Bradford, Kichard Bush, and 
W. D. McCracken. He who does not know the 
great weight of the opinions of these men, when 
they agree upon a single point, understands little 
of the political literature of our time. 

Sec. 76. Kent and Webster. — Chancellor James 
Kent, called attention (Commentaries, I. 234) 
to "the dangerous tendency of such combined 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 185 

forces as universal [manhood] suffrage, frequent 
elections, all offices for short periods, all offices 
elective and an unchecked press." By an un- 
checked press he meant newspapers controlled by 
professional politicians and not subject to a 
proper law of libel. In 1835, Daniel Webster 
spoke (Works IV. 179) in the Senate of the United 
States, against the Spoils System which Jackson 
had introduced into the administrative depart- 
ment of the federal government, and demanded a 
radical change, without which he predicted that 
our political experiment "must inevitably fail." 

Sec. 77. James Bryce. — In his American Com- 
monwealth (II. 700) written in 1880, James Bryce 
thus warns us: "There is a part of the At- 
lantic where the westward speeding steam-vessel 
always expects to encounter fogs. On the fourth 
or fifth day of the voyage, while still in the bright 
sunlight, one sees at a distance a long low dark 
gray line across the bows, and is told this is the 
first of the fog banks which have to be tra- 
versed. Presently the vessel is upon the cloud 
and rushes into its chilling embrace, not knowing 
what perils of icebergs may be shrouded within 
the encompassing fog. So America, in her swift 
onward progress, sees looming on the horizon and 
now no longer distant, a time of mists and shad- 
ows, wherein dangers may lie concealed, whose 
form and magnitude she can scarcely yet conjec- 
ture. . . . High economic authorities pronounce 



186 REEOEM OK REVOLUTION? 

that the beginnings of this time of pressure are 
not more than thirty years ahead. ... It will be 
a time of trial for democratic institutions." 

In another place (I. 318) he says with the evi- 
dent intent of giving a warning to a people who do 
not understand their danger, "The liability to be 
caught by fallacies, the inability to recognize 
facts which are not seen but must be inf erentially 
found to exist, the incapacity to imagine a future 
which must result from the unchecked operation 
of present forces are defects of the ordinary citi- 
zen in all countries" not excepting the United 
States. 

Sec. 78. Harper. — The prediction of Bryce may 
have inspired a similar idea in an address deliv- 
ered before the University of California on the 
23rd of March 1899 by W. R. Harper, President 
of the University of Chicago. He said "Another 
quarter of a century of deterioration, another 
quarter of a century without radical modification 
of the present plan will put popular government 
in a position which will be embarrassing in the 
extreme." 

Sec. 79. Hoist. — Hoist says that the American 
people regard their federal constitution with "a 
most ruinous idolatry" (I. 68); that their officials 
generally are distinguished by "half educated 
mediocrity" (I. 203); that Congress habitually 
treats important economical questions with 
frivolity and incapacity (I. 203); that "the politi- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 187 

cal thought of Americans is much more superfi- 
cial and immature than that of Europeans" 
(I. 74); and is distinguished by "pharisaical self- 
righteousness" (I. 34); and that "It is owing only 
to the astonishing vitality of the people of the 
United States, and to the altogether unsurpassed 
and unsurpassable favor of their natural condi- 
tions that the state has not succumbed under the 
onerous burden of the curse." Elsewhere (II. 77) 
he says "The undeniable and sadly plain fact is, 
that since that time [1829] the people have be- 
gun to exchange the leadership of a small number 
of statesmen and politicians of a higher order for 
the rule of an ever increasing crowd of politicians 
of high and low degree, down even to the pot- 
house politician and the common thief, in the pro- 
tecting mantle of demagogism. When people from 
the region lying between the limits of society and 
the house of correction obtained a controlling in- 
fluence in politics, this at first appeared as the 
consequence of an unfortunate condition of local 
affairs. And that politics became a profession in 
which mediocrity, on an ever descending scale, 
dominated, and moral laxity became the rule, if 
not the requisite, people refused to consider an 
unfortunate condition so long as a life devoted to 
acquisition approached nearer to the goal of its 
satisfaction. Live and let live had become a 
general maxim to such an extent, that the politi- 
cians marvelled at even the uprising in which the 



188 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

people tore to pieces the bridle to which they had 
been so long used, when it looked as if they were 
to be ridden into the abyss to which they had, 
since the origin of the republic, in part, been 
drawn nearer, and to which, in part, they had 
nearer and nearer glided. 

"A popular state in which the generality drops 
into a dolce far niente in relation to politics, seeing 
in the election of their legislators, in universal 
suffrage and the like, in and of themselves, the 
guaranties of freedom, is ever on a declivitous 
path. . . . But when, in a popular state, politics 
become a despised trade, the state is brought face 
to face with the question of life or death." 

Sec. 80. Mill. — One of the best books on modern 
democracy, John Stuart Mill's Representative Gov- 
ernment suggests in many passages the serious de- 
fects of the American Constitution which he had 
not studied in its details, and therefore did not 
discuss, except in a few brief and incidental pas- 
sages. He took occasion however to express his 
intense dislike of our constitution, and said that it 
is "a collective despotism," (166) a potent influ- 
ence inconsistent with the spirit of political equal- 
ity. Further he says (160, 171.) "It is an admitted 
fact that in the American democracy, which is 
constructed on this faulty model, the highly-cul- 
tivated members of the community, except such 
of them as are willing to sacrifice their own 
opinions and modes of judgment, and become the 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 189 

servile mouthpieces of their inferiors in knowl- 
edge, do not even offer themselves for Congress 
or the State Legislatures, so certain is it that they 
would have no chance of being returned. . . . 

"Almost all travelers are struck by the fact 
that every American is in some sense both a 
patriot and a person of cultivated intelligence; 
and M. de Tocqueville has shown how close the 
connection is between these qualities and their 
democratic institutions. No such wide diffusion 
of the ideas, tastes, and sentiments of educated 
minds has ever been seen elsewhere, or even con- 
ceived of as attainable. Yet this is nothing to 
what we might look for in a government equally 
democratic in its unexclusiveness, but better or- 
ganized in other important points. For political 
life is indeed in America a most valuable school, 
but it is a school from which the ablest teachers 
are excluded; the first minds in the country being 
as effectually shut out from the national represen- 
tation, and from public functions generally, as 
if they were under a formal disqualification. The 
Demos, too, being in America, the one source of 
power, all the selfish ambition of the country 
gravitates toward it, as it does in despotic coun- 
tries toward the monarch; the People, like the 
despot, is pursued with adulation and syco- 
phancy, and the corrupting effects of power fully 
keep pace with its improving and enobling in- 
fluences." 



190 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

In his Discussions (380) he observes that "A cen- 
ter of resistance is as necessary when the opinion 
of the majority is sovereign as when the ruling 
power is a hierarchy or an aristocracy. . . . 
Where no such point d'appui exists, there the hu- 
man race will inevitably degenerate; and the 
question whether the United States for instance 
will sink into another China resolves itself, to us, 
into the question whether such a center of resist- 
ance will gradually evolve itself or not." 

Sec. 81. Lecky. — Lecky is another able foreign 
author who seems to doubt whether our constitu- 
tion will continue to work well under the in- 
fluences now dominant. He says (Democracy and 
Liberty, I. 133) "As the country fills up . . . the 
necessity of placing the administration, in all its 
branches, in trustworthy and honest hands, must 
be more felt and the future of America seems to 
me very largely to depend upon the success with 
which reformers can attain this end." 

Elsewhere he remarks (I, 113.) that "There is 
one thing which is worse than corruption [in a 
government]. It is the acquiescence of a Whole 
people in [that] corruption. No feature of Ameri- 
can life strikes a stranger so powerfully as the 
extraordinary indifference, partly cynicism and 
partly good nature, with which notorious frauds 
and notorious corruption, in the sphere of politics, 
are viewed by American public opinion." These 
remarks are acute and just. The people are not 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 191 

indifferent to their political evils, but having had 
no satisfactory remedial plan, and being full of 
faith in their national future, they have tried to 
make the best of their situation. 

Sec. 82. Burnett. — A lawyer, who was the first 
governor of the state of California and after- 
wards its Chief Justice, Peter H. Burnett, pub- 
lished a pamphlet advocating a radical reform of 
the American constitution (see section 101) and 
also an interesting autobiography. In the latter 
work (87) he makes the following remarks; 
"When the population becomes dense, dependent 
and suffering, and for that reason more corrupt, 
then will come the genuine test of our existing 
theory; and I think without a thorough and radi- 
cal amendment it must fail. The three princi- 
ples of universal [manhood] suffrage, elective 
[executive and judicial] offices and short terms, 
will in due time politically demoralize any people 
in the world. ... I am now of the opinion that 
the masses will never permit a sound conserva- 
tive amendment of our theory except by revolu- 
tion, which I think will occur in the next fifty 
years." Thus he wrote in 1880. In 1863 in his 
American Theortj of Government (77) he said "There 
is no government less worthy of the respect of 
mankind and of the obedience of those whom it 
mocks with a farcical rule and protection than 
that which is impotent to accomplish the very 
ends for which government is alone instituted." 



192 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 83. McCracken. — W. D. McCracken, an 
American who has written an excellent book en- 
titled The Rise of the Stviss Republic, in which he 
compares the Helvetian with the American gov- 
ernment, observes (342) that "It has become 
somewhat of a commonplace assertion that poli- 
tics in the United States have reached the lowest 
stage to which they may safely go. There seems 
to be no longer any necessity to prove this proposi- 
tion, for the general conviction has gone abroad, 
amply justified by the whole course of history, 
that no democracy can hope to withstand the cor- 
rupting influences now at work in our midst, un- 
less certain radical reforms are carried to a suc- 
cessful conclusion." 

Sec. 84. Bradford. — Discussing the political 
condition of the United States, Gamaliel Brad- 
ford remarks (I. 430) that "if the government is 
loose and capricious; if law as well as adminis- 
tration is changing and unsteady; if private in- 
terests get the upper hand, and the people imbibe 
the idea that they are being sacrificed though 
they do not know how; if the men in public life 
are believed to be caring much more for the in- 
terests of themselves and their powerful sup- 
porters than for those of the people at large; if 
the only personalities whom the people can see 
are regarded by them with distrust and contempt; 
— then the road is straight, even if more or less 
long, to revolution and military despotism." 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 193 

The ifs in this passage are all intended to suggest 
prominent features of the political condition of 
the United States as Mr. Bradford sees them. 
When he says "if private interests get the upper 
hand" he means evidently that he accepts the cry 
of the demagogues that the trusts and corpora- 
tions are oppressing the people, an idea which I 
do not accept. 

In another passage the same author says 
(I. 56) "The future history of this country will de- 
termine whether it will be covered with immortal 
glory, growing brighter as the centuries elapse 
or whether, the Union being displaced by a mili- 
tary empire or destroyed and local despotisms es- 
tablished as the result of bloody civil wars, it will 
be banished to the storehouse of political relics. 
. . . Sound organization is the basis and founda- 
tion stone of permanent success and to it we, in 
this country, must turn our attention, if we wish 
to escape evils which if they are less obvious than 
those of a hundred years ago are hardly less dan- 
gerous to the life of the republic." 

Sec. 85. Hyslop. — According to Prof. Hyslop, 
though "we indulge the pleasing illusion that 
democracy is a paradise" our political condition 
is "anarchy not government" (33) our financial 
management is ruinously expensive, our system 
of national taxation is shameful, our elections 
and legislatures are controlled by bribery (248) 
and (117) "Neither the legislature nor the electo- 



194 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

rate is qualified to perform the tasks imposed up- 
on it, and the executive is neither permitted nor 
able to do it. Between the constitutional dis- 
qualifications of the executive and the moral dis- 
qualifications of the legislative power the ten- 
dency seems to be straight toward chaos." He 
admits (278) that "our institutions are a failure/' 
and complains (179) that our political methods 
are "worthy of pandemonium." He remarks 
further (32) that "Machine politics are completely 
subversive both of democracy and of the principle 
of responsibility for which democracy is supposed 
to stand. It constitutes nothing but a system of 
self-appointed rulers and the principle of elective 
representatives of which we boast becomes a 
farce." On another page (35) he says "A small 
country with a scanty population, few sources and 
industries and similar social sentiments may go 
on without much difficulty under democratic in- 
stitution, [I suppose he means of the present 
American pattern] . But a vast territory with un- 
told material wealth, waiting for labor, a growing 
population, and with an increase in the severity 
of the struggle for existence and the great di- 
versity of moral, economic, political and social 
sentiments, must call for government that corre- 
sponds to this complexity." 

Sec. 86. Rush. — Kichard Rush, an American 
eminent in the first half of the XlXth century, 
said in 1853 {Biography of W. W. Seaton, 215) "This 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 195 

now established practice of universal change 
every four years and the terrible contests and 
corruptions to which it will give birth in our 
presidential elections, the ratio of each increasing 
geometrically, as offices and emoluments grow 
more numerous and tempting, must end in break- 
ing the government to pieces." 

Sec. 87. Wright.— In 1892 John A. Wright a 
highly respectable lawyer who had been ap- 
pointed by the Bar Association of San Francisco 
to a position on its Judiciary Committee, pub- 
lished a pamphlet in which (14) he said "Do we 
not present a pitiful, nay, contemptible, aspect to 
humanity? This government is part of ourselves. 
And if we are afflicted with a loathsome disease, 
should we make an exhibition to the world of our 
sores? If we proclaim to the world that we are 
incompetent to create efficient tribunals, or to se- 
lect just judges, how can we hope to be respected? 
How can we expect our children to grow up with 
love of country or regard for morality? If a gov- 
ernment can secure to us neither property or 
honor, how long shall we endure it? And though 
we may be willing to live our lives in cowardly 
suspicion and distrust of those to whom we com- 
mit the sacred trust of administering justice, shall 
not a better generation arise to destroy a system 
of government that debases the soul of man? 
. . . If the day is not approaching when we shall 
put faith in the impartiality of our tribunals, the 



196 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

day is approaching when an end will be put to 
our present form of civil society." This publica- 
tion by Mr. Wright provoked no protest, censure, 
refutation or denial; its author continues to stand 
well in the Bar Association and before the Bench. 
His complaint refers almost exclusively to the 
judiciary and yet that is, as all admit, by far the 
best department of our government, and is not 
worse in California than in the other states gen- 
erally. 

Sec. 88. Various Croakings. — Sheldon Amos who 
is an eminent living authority on the principles 
of government expresses the opinion in his 
Science of Politics (209) that "The United States 
are only beginning to grapple practically and 
seriously with the constitutional problem" and 
that "the irresponsible and autocratic powers of 
the President coupled with his firm tenure of 
office," threaten disaster. 

In his Psychology of Socialism (337) Gustave Le 
Bon gives a brief account of the Pullman Strike, 
and then says "The United States would seem 
fated to furnish the Old World with the first ex- 
amples of the struggles which will take place be- 
tween intelligence, capacity [and] capital [on 
one side] and the terrible army of the unfit [on 
the other.] . . . The issue of the struggle in the 
United States will doubtless be their division into 
a number of rival republics." In his Psychology of 
Peoples (148), he warns his readers that our coun- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 197 

try "is threatened, in consequence of its recent in- 
vasion by an immense number of inferior and un- 
assimilable elements, by a gigantic civil war." 

In his English Constitution, Bagehot confesses 
that he cannot imagine "how any free government 
is to exist in societies where so many bad ele- 
ments are so much perturbed." 

Tocqueville's Democracy in America, written 
albout 1835, was an excellent book for its time, be- 
fore our Spoils System and our Committee System 
had obtained full swing, but is now behind the 
times. In many passages, it indicates its author's 
opinion that a satisfactory national government 
is impossible under a federal constitution. 

In his Study of the United States, the Marquis de 
Talleyrand-Perigord laments our "unexampled 
political rottenness" (223) and asserts that our 
government is "rapidly advancing to certain 
ruin" (224). 

A Congressional Report on Election Frauds sub- 
mitted to the House of Representatives March 
3, 1879, and quoted as correct by Eaton, (442) 
said "At the end of each four years, the entire 
federal patronage ... is collected into one lot 
and the people divide themselves into two par- 
ties struggling ... to control the enormous pa- 
tronage. ... A prize so great . . . would jeopard 
the peace and safety of any nation. ... No na- 
tion can withstand a strife among its own peo- 
ple, so general, so intense and so demoralizing." 



198 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

James Russell Lowell lamented (Writings VI. 
99) in 1885 that the political condition of the 
country had been growing worse for the previous 
twenty years, and (VI. 210) that the people seem- 
ed to regard corruption of the government as 
something beyond remedy, and (VI. 214) that the 
public business of the nation was managed by a 
succession of apprentices, incompetent for any 
useful career. As Mr. Lowell had held high of- 
ficial station, his opinion on this subject is en- 
titled to much weight. 

In a letter written May 23d 1857 to H. J. Ran- 
dall T. B. Macaulay said "Either some Caesar or 
Napoleon will seize the reins of government with 
a strong hand or your republic will be fearfully 
plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the 
XXth century." I am satisfied that this let- 
ter is genuine though it does not appear in Tre- 
velyan's Life and Letters of T. B. Macaulay. 

George William Curtis complains of the Spoils 
System (Orations, II. 4.) that by "vitiating the 
very character of the people it endangers the per- 
manence of the nation. And yet however plain 
the peril, because the ship bored by a thousand 
worms has not yet sunk, there are those who tell 
us that wormeaten wood is as safe as sound tim- 
ber." 

In a speech delivered in Congress on January 
23, 1872, J. A. Garfield (I. 3) said the great expen- 
diture of the French government between 1860 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 199 

and 1869 indicated that it was "rushing to certain 
and inevitable ruin," and then, turning to Ameri- 
can affairs, remarked that "we have seen in some 
of our municipal and perhaps in our state govern- 
ments, the same process going on, which if not ar- 
rested, must inevitably bring them to a fate 
hardly less deplorable." 

John C. Calhoun says in his Discourse on Gov- 
ernment that the Spoils System is "the most cor- 
rupting, loathsome and dangerous disease that 
can infect a popular government." 

In The North American Review of July 1878, Fran- 
cis Parkman remarks that "There are prophets of 
evil who see in the disorders that involve us the 
precursors of speedy ruin; but complete disrup- 
tion and anarchy are, we may hope, still far off." 

Eben G. Scott, author of a book on Reconstruc- 
tion (187) hears "the mutterings of a revolution 
which are ominous of a violent reorganization of 
society." 

In his treatise on Municipal Government, Delos F. 
Wilcox says "Democracy is on trial in the United 
States," evidently meaning that our government 
is a questionable experiment. He should have 
said that a Sham Democracy, based on federalism, 
conflicting departments and the Spoils, has been 
tried and has been proved to be a disgraceful fail- 
ure. 

In his Ills of the South (213), Otken writes that 
"Men, who live in the South, familiar with what 



200 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

has been going on for twenty-five years, seeing the 
strong racial qualities of this people, involving 
black and white in ruin and who dare to speak out 
without gloss or varnish and with no selfish mo- 
tive governing them, are bound to say the situa- 
tion is full of alarm." On another page (227) he 
declares that "the factors of ruin among the black 
people are making steady progress." 

Sec. 89. Tropical Colonies. — Besides the dangers 
which confronted our country, when most of 
the preceding predictions were written, others 
of later date, and full of serious menace, have 
arisen or shown themselves more distinctly. 
The recent acquisition of tropical colonies, Ha- 
waii, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, abound 
with difficulties and perilous problems. In all 
of these new possessions the majority of the 
inhabitants are of the black or yellow race, 
illiterate, ignorant of the English language, un- 
accustomed to self-government, heterogeneous in 
blood, and in many cases different in speech, 
and barbarous or savage in culture. They are not 
more fit for political power than the Jamaican 
negroes who, after having the ballot were de- 
prived of it as the only means of saving the is- 
lands from anarchy. 

We have no stock of men like the officials in the 
Crown colonies of Great Britain, educated in all 
the knowledge needed for the government of such 
possessions, and, if we had them, we would not 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 201 

appoint them, because they would not be the ser- 
vants of the Spoils System; and because, if we 
should appoint them, they would not accept the 
places to work for small salaries and be turned 
out at the end of four years. Integrity, thorough 
training and the safe traditions that can be ac- 
quired only under a permanent tenure of office, 
can never characterize the American administra- 
tion under the influences that are now in control 
of Congress. The government of these insular 
possessions may be marked by plundering^, out- 
rages, revolts, and wars to find a parallel for 
which we must go back to the Eoman republic in 
the times of the Gracchi and of Cicero. 

Sec. 90. Negro Demoralization, — The North 
American Review of June, 1900, contains an im- 
pressive and apparently a truthful article on the 
condition of the negroes in the United States 
by J. R. Straton, professor in the Mercer Uni- 
versity at Macon, Georgia, who tells us that 
the proportion of crime is ten fold greater among 
the blacks than among their white neighbors; 
that it is twice as great in Tennessee and Mary- 
land as in Mississippi and Louisiana; greater 
in Pennsylvania than in Maryland; and greater 
among the educated than among the illiterate; 
and that on account of their brutal acts of vio- 
lence in the cotton states "there have been a 
dozen times within the past year or two, when 
the least indiscreet act on either side might have 



202 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

precipitated a race war." Without a strong and 
wise national government this negro problem will 
never be solved with credit to the nation. 

Sec. 91. Parallel Predictions. — In their number, 
clearness, authority and significance, the predic- 
tions quoted, in this chapter, of an approaching 
political convulsion in the United States, are more 
remarkable than those made by Chesterfield, Vic- 
tor Mirabeau, Eousseau, Voltaire, Louis XV, and 
others of the French Kevolution of 1789. Then 
the warnings were disregarded by the people in 
power and the crash was most frightful; and 
though our crash would be different, it too may, 
be one of the great calamities of history. 

In 1753, thirty-six years before the attack on the 
Bastile, Lord Chesterfield wrote "In short all the 
symptoms, which I have ever met with in history 
previous to great changes and revolutions in gov- 
ernment, now exist and daily increase in France." 
Victor Mirabeau warned his countrymen that 
they were in danger of a general overturn. Louis 
XV said "After us the deluge." Fifteen years af- 
ter his death it came. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 203 



CHAPTER V. 



REFORM. 



Section 92. Remedies. — One of the greatest 
misfortunes of our country has been the failure of 
our statesmen and political philosophers to ex- 
plain, in print, the main defects of our govern- 
ment long since, by their silence and implied ac- 
quiescence, permitting the people to imagine that 
the course of national affairs was satisfactory 
while, in fact, the evils were expanding and mul- 
tiplying to a highly dangerous degree. 

We need a reform which shall give us a consoli- 
dated nationality with all the attributes of sov- 
ereignty and a harmonious, honest and competent 
body of officials. This change is not impossible; 
it has been achieved in other countries where the 
people are less intelligent than they are here. 

The national government should be consoli- 
dated not centralized. Much of the power, now 
held by the wire pullers, should be given to the 
people. The voters should be made to feel that 
they have much more influence in the government 
than they have had since 1830. Every town, city, 
county and province or department should have its 
own elections and control its local affairs, under a 



204 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

system uniform from the Atlantic to the Pacific, 
and from Canada to Mexico. A proper method of 
consolidation will greatly increase the interest of 
citizens in their local political affairs and give 
them a higher pride in their nation. It will lay 
the foundation for a strong and universal patri- 
otic feeling. 

Our Constitution should give us one country, 
one nation, one flag, one allegiance, one army, 
one navy, one citizenship, one rule of suffrage, one 
monetary law, one code of civil right, one code 
of political rights, and one code of judicial pro- 
cedure. It should be the product of the wisest 
statesmanship, not of the basest demagogism. 

Objections will, of course, be offered to any 
proposed reform; those, who profit by ancient 
abuses, usually make strenuous efforts to main- 
tain them. The federalists will assert that con- 
solidation would centralize political power and 
destroy all the local liberties. They will pretend 
not to know that the cities, of Great Britain, 
Prussia and France, have much more independ- 
ence of action than those of the United States. 
They will predict that the overthrow of the Spoils 
System would lead to establishment of a Bureau- 
cracy by which they mean an oppressive and in- 
solvent body of public servants; though the fact 
is that we now have a worse body of officials, a 
true Kakistocracy or government of the worst 
men, than can be found in any other enlightened 
nation. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 205 

If this book has any importance its most valua- 
ble part is the explanation of our political condi- 
tion. When that is generally and clearly under- 
stood, public opinion will demand and compel the 
adoption of a remedy. After the people can dis- 
tinctly see the processes by which they are plun- 
dered, they will, with great urgency, demand a 
reform, the character of which is the subject of 
this chapter. 

For the purpose of assisting my readers to 
form clear ideas about the best method of reform- 
ing our government, I submit to them a proposed 
national constitution, different in form and ex- 
pression from any heretofore drafted, and de- 
signed partly in the hope that it will provoke 
thought and inquiry. 

Sec. 93. My Plan. — If the defects of our gov- 
ernment have been truthfully described here, our 
citizens should not only demand a reform, but 
they should study reformatory plans one of which 
I now submit to them. All its important fea- 
tures have been approved by experience, the saf- 
est guide. 

The present federal constitution provides that 
it may be changed by amendments adopted by 
Congress or by a constitutional Convention called 
by Congress at the demand of two-thirds of the 
states, and afterwards approved by three-fourths 
of the states acting either by their legislatures or 
by special conventions. There is no mention of a 



206 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

new constitution, the authorization for which 
should be given by an amendment to the fifth ar- 
ticle. I propose such an amendment so that a 
convention may draft an entirely new constitu- 
tion, — and that Congress shall afterwards call a 
convention, consisting of ninety delegates, to 
meet after a lapse of two years in Washington to 
frame a new constitution, each to receive f 5,000 
for his service, including the studies between the 
time of appointment and the meeting of the con- 
vention. The interval of two years would give 
time not only for study by the delegates but for 
discussion by all the masters of political science 
in books and magazines, a discussion that would 
interest and instruct the whole world. I would 
have forty-five state delegates, one from each 
state, appointed by its governor; and as many 
delegates at large appointed by the President of 
the United States, all to be qualified by having 
held some high office in the federal or state gov- 
ernment or a presidency or legal, political or 
financial professorship in a great University. 

As suitable persons for membership in this con- 
vention I suggest, without their permission, Ben- 
jamin .Harrison, Grover Cleveland, Thomas B. 
Reed, John G. Carlisle, Andrew D. White, Seth 
Low, Prof. Woodrow Wilson, Richard Choate, 
James Olney, Prof. Oliver W. Holmes, Dr. Ed- 
ward R. Taylor, Prof. F. J. Goodnow, Prof. J. H. 
Hyslop, Horace Davis, Prof. H. J. Ford, Prof. E. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 207 

E. A. Seligman, Prof. Henry C. Adams, Gamaliel 
Bradford, Albert Stickney, Albert Shaw, Abbot 
L. Lowell and Dorman B. Eaton. 

Sec. 94. New Constitution, — This is the form of 
the new constitution which I propose: — 

1. — The people of the country hitherto known 
as the United States of America, adopt this con- 
stitution for the purposes of reforming their gov- 
ernment, defining the character and spirit of their 
political institutions, increasing their harmony 
and prosperity, developing and more precisely 
defining their political and civil liberties, and 
limiting the power of their national legislature. 

2. — The name of the country shall be 
and that of the nation, the Eepublic of 

3. — The Senate, the national legislative body, 
shall provide for the efficient protection of all 
citizens, for the maintenance of law and order, 
for the prompt and cheap settlement of civil and 
criminal litigation, for the enforcement of politi- 
cal equality, for the promotion of the greatest 
good of the greatest number, for the advancement 
of knowledge and education, for the encourage- 
ment of the useful and ornamental arts, and for 
the preservation of harmony between the differ- 
ent classes of society. 

4. — The Senate shall be a single legislative body 
with one hundred and ninety members, divided 
into three classes. The first class shall number 
one hundred and thirty-five who shall be elected 



208 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

by the people for full terms of nine years by forty- 
five election districts, each of which shall choose 
one senator every third year, except that at the 
first election and at the second election under this 
constitution, some shall obtain only parts of full 
terms, as distributed by lot after the first election. 
The second class shall number forty-five, who 
shall be elected by the Senate itself for full terms 
of nine years, fifteen every third year, except that 
at the first election fifteen shall be chosen for 
three and fifteen for six years. The third class 
shall number ten and shall be appointed by the 
President to hold during his pleasure. No one 
shall be qualified to be a Senator of the second or 
third class unless he shall have previously served 
a full congressional term under this constitution 
or under the constitution of 1787, or has been a 
member of the cabinet, or has been judge of a 
court of record for four years, or a colonel, or 
higher officer in the army of the country, or cap- 
tain or higher officer in the navy of the country, 
or has been the governor of a state or province, 
or unless he be appointed to the office of Senator 
by the President for the purpose of making him a 
minister. By a majority vote Congress may ex- 
pel any of its members, and such expulsion shall 
disqualify its object to become a member again 
until after a lapse of eight years. A military or 
naval officer appointed or elected Senator may 
retain his rank, with a right to restoration to 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 209 

active service after the close of his senatorial 
term, if his age permits. 

5. — The Senate shall have authority without a 
trial to remove from office the President; and by 
a two-thirds vote without a trial to remove any 
officer appointed by the President; and such re- 
moval shall render the persons so removed inca- 
pable of holding any office under presidential ap- 
pointment until after a lapse of five years. 

6. — The Senate shall provide for the organiza- 
tion and define the jurisdiction of the judicial de- 
partment of the government including a Supreme 
Court and subordinate tribunals. 

7. — The political divisions of the country are 
subject to the control of the Senate which shall 
enact laws for their government, giving to the 
people a large influence and an active interest in 
the management of their local affairs under a 
harmonious and a well disciplined official system. 

8. — The head of the government styled the 
President, shall be elected by the Senate to hold 
office during its pleasure. He shall appoint the 
Ministers,the Chief Justice and the Associate Jus- 
tices of the Supreme Court, and of the provincial 
Courts, the Governors of the provinces, the am- 
bassadors to foreign nations, the generals, col- 
onels and captains of the army; the admirals, 
commodores and captains of navy and such other 
officers as the Senate may direct, and under such 
laws as the Senate may enact. He and his sub- 



210 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

ordinate officers under his direction, shall have 
power to declare martial law, and to suspend the 
writ of Habeas Corpus. The judges and other 
officers to be appointed by the president under 
the authority of this section, and the subordinate 
administrative officers shall hold office during 
good behavior, and may be dismissed in methods 
prescribed by the Senate. 

9. — In case of the removal of the President 
from office, or of his death, resignation or ina- 
bility to discharge the duties of his office, the 
senior member of the cabinet shall succeed to his 
office and exercise its duties until the Senate 
shall elect a person to fill the vacancy. The 
right of succession to presidential authority after 
the head of the cabinet shall devolve on the other 
members in regular order, in case of vacancy or 
inability. 

10. — Xo person shall be President or justice of 
a national court, or member of the cabinet or gov- 
ernor of a province unless he be a native of the 
territory that now belongs at the time of his 
birth to the United States, nor unless at the time 
of his election or appointment he be thirty years 
of age. Eesidence in a congressional district or 
in a province shall not be a necessary qualifica- 
tion for any office in the national government. 

11. — The Cabinet shall comprise twelve minis- 
ters, who shall be the administrative Committee 
of Congress and shall be acceptable to the major- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 211 

ity of that body. One of them appointed by the 
President shall be Prime Minister and he shall 
appoint and may dismiss his associates. The 
twelve shall each be at the head of one of the ad- 
ministrative divisions first the Interior; second 
the Treasury; third the Exterior; fourth the 
Provinces; fifth Law; sixth Education and the 
Fine Arts; seventh Commerce; eighth Manufac- 
tures; ninth Agriculture and Mines; tenth Mails; 
eleventh Army; and twelfth Navy. The Prime 
Minister may have charge of any department. 
The jurisdiction of these divisions may be defined 
and changed by the Senate. 

Sec. 95. Remarks. — A legislature organized on 
my plan would be superior to any described in 
history. In its single chamber, its long term of 
membership, the slow change of its partisan char- 
acter, and the administrative experience of its 
members, it suggests the Roman Senate, to 
which it would be superior because the majority 
of its members would be lawyers, scholars and 
business men, whose ambition it would be to en- 
rich their country by the arts of peace, and not by 
the plunder of hostile countries and subject prov- 
inces. 

A serious defect in nearly all the national legis- 
latures of our time is that all the members of the 
popular house, elected by the people, are chosen 
at the same time, thus facilitating great changes 
in membership and sudden alterations in policy. 



212 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

The proper remedy for this evil is the rule, ap- 
proved by experience in some municipal councils, 
that not more than one-third of the members shall 
be chosen for full terms at any one general elec- 
tion, and that every electoral district shall have 
three members, each to hold his office for a full 
term of six years. 

Another principle that has been applied with 
excellent results on municipal councils, and 
would serve as well on national legislatures is 
that of filling one-fourth of the places by ap- 
pointment with persons who have distinguished 
themselves in the public service and have ac- 
quired a large stock of valuable official experi- 
ence. This method of securing a fit man for a 
legislature reminds us of the Roman Senate, 
every member of which was appointed for life 
after he had held the office of Consul or Praetor 
to which he had been elected by the people after 
serving creditably in ten campaigns, usually in 
some responsible positions of command. Thus 
the Senate collected among its members the high- 
est ability and experience of the republic. It 
made Rome the mistress of the world and exerted 
a political influence on mankind inferior only to 
that of the English Parliament. 

In the British Parliament and in the Congress 
of the United States, the two legislative houses 
represent separate classes or interests which must 
cooperate to make the government successful. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 213 

No such reason exists for the maintenance of the 
bicameral system in our state legislatures, but in 
them also, two chambers are considered indispen- 
sable because each falls under the control of a 
leader or clique, and each corrects many errors 
and defeats many injudicious or corrupt purposes 
in the work of the other. The less fit the men for 
their positions, the greater the need of a separa- 
tion into two houses. 

The second chamber and the veto are valuable 
where incompetency and dishonesty are so promi- 
nent among legislators as they are in the United 
States now; but under a Cabinet government, 
with a well constituted Congress, a second Cham- 
ber would be an element of danger, by leading to 
conflicts of polity and compromises of fraud such 
as are now frequent in Washington. 

The number of Senators should not exceed two 
hundred; as many as could participate actively in 
legislative proceedings. They should hold for 
long terms so that their places will be coveted by 
able and successful men; and not more than one- 
fourth of them should be elected by the people in 
any one year, so that the partisan character of 
their body should not be subject to frequent and 
sudden changes. 

All the national laws should emanate directly 
or indirectly from the Senate. It should have 
exclusive jurisdiction to define all legal rights, 
provide for their enforcement, enact civil and 



214 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

criminal codes, and direct the methods of judicial 
procedure. It should regulate suffrage, and 
maintain or control educational, charitable and 
correctional institutions. All the courts should 
be organized on a harmonious plan, with strict 
subordination of the lower to the higher tribu- 
nals, the judges to hold for life under administra- 
tive appointment. 

The election of the President by popular vote 
is a blunder. It brings the legislative and exec- 
utive departments into frequent conflict and thus 
breeds inefficiency and extravagance. It has led 
to the general adoption and great power of the 
spoils system and thus corrupted all branches of 
the government and brought disgrace on the na- 
tion. 

The independent position of the President and 
his cabinet under the constitution of 1787 has 
rendered it impossible to obtain harmonious man- 
agement of congressional work. Legislation in- 
stead of being directed by the cabinet as it should 
be, is controlled by thirty or forty committees, 
each of which tries to get as much money and 
power as it can, and all of which in their strug- 
gles have carried the system of logrolling to a 
pernicious prominence not approached in any 
other great country. 

Instead of being elected by the people the head 
of the Administration should be designated by 
the legislature and then the administrative and 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 215 

legislative departments of the government would 
never be discordant as they often are under the 
present system. The subordination of the ad- 
ministrative to the legislative authority gives the 
best combination of flexibility with strength in 
government, a fact conclusively established in 
the experience of modern Europe; and therefore 
it is that France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Den- 
mark, Sweden and Spain have adopted the Brit- 
ish rule that the Ministry must be a committee of 
the national legislature, under the monarch who 
has been reduced nominally at least to a position 
of ceremonial headship with the obligation of 
acting in harmony with the representatives of the 
people. France and Switzerland have presidents 
and ministers elected by the legislatures and al- 
ways in harmony with them. Germany and 
Austria have many British and few American 
ideas in their constitutions. The political world 
is moving in the British not in the American 
track. 

Except the President, his ministers and a few 
others holding partisan places, the administrative 
officers should be admitted by competitive exam- 
ination to the public service between the ages of 
twenty and thirty, and should hold during good 
behavior and be promoted for merit only. Then 
we should have an honest, efficient and economi- 
cal public service, one very different from that 
which has been maintained since 1830. 



216 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Judicial power to nullify legislative acts for 
unconstitutionality is an indispensable part of 
our present political system. Without it the 
peace and prosperity of the Union could not have 
been preserved. It has been exercised in hun- 
dreds of important federal and state cases and in 
its general influence has been so beneficent that 
no person of much weight has demanded its aboli- 
tion. It has been commended by many foreign 
writers as the most original and most meritorious 
feature of our government and it gives to our 
judiciary, the best branch of our public service, a 
peculiar importance and dignity. This power 
owes all its value to the peculiar unfitness of our 
national and state legislatures for the functions 
entrusted to them. If they were well qualified 
to make laws, we should not need to entrust the 
authority to declare their acts unconstitutional to 
judicial tribunals. The British Parliament has 
not needed such a check, neither did the Eoman 
Senate; nor will the American Congress when or- 
ganized wisely. 

The new constitution should contain a clause 
in reference to the date or dates when it or part 
of it are to take effect, but the phraseology of 
such a provision should be controlled by condi- 
tions to be fixed by the convention. 

I intentionally omit a declaration of the popu- 
lar rights of the liberties of person, speech, press, 
worship and public meeting, the equality of civil 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 217 

and political rights, the publicity of govern- 
mental proceedings and records, the prohibitions 
of perpetuities, long or consecutive entails, arbi- 
trary arrests and confiscations, arbitrary arrests 
and seizures, imprisonment for debt, and the pro- 
lix administration of justice. Under a well or- 
ganized government, these rights should be left 
under the control of the legislature, as they are 
in Great Britain. Constitutional limitations 
have been multiplied and amplified far beyond 
the bounds of wisdom, in our country, and by in- 
creasing technicalities have often smothered the 
principles of justice. 

A great nation has urgent need of a national 
bank, and on this subject I adopt the language of 
Hugh McCulloch who, after having been the Sec- 
retary of our Federal Treasury, the ablest man, 
except Alexander Hamilton, who ever held the 
place, says in his Men and Measures (61) "What 
the United States needs to-day, and will need 
still more when the National Banking System 
shall cease to exist, is a national bank with capi- 
tal enough to enable it to act as a regulator of 
the rates of interest, and consequently to a large 
extent of business. Such a bank is the Bank of 
England, which has been of incalculable benefit 
to Great Britain — a bank which, in its manage- 
ment, is outside of -politics, and over which there 
are never any partisan squabbles; which is inde- 
pendent of the Crown, and practically of Parlia- 



218 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

ment; which keeps its fingers on the business 
pulse of the country, and by its wise and prompt 
action contributes immensely to the stability and 
healthiness of trade." 

The reformation of our government would en- 
able us soon to annex Canada, and thus to accom- 
plish what should be one of the chief objects of 
our national ambition. Our neighbors on the 
north detest our political abuses, but as soon as 
we correct them and give satisfactory assurances 
of an intention to adopt and maintain a policy of 
harmony with all the branches of the great 
Anglo-Saxon family, they will be ready to come 
into our Union, and to share the benefits of our 
great national household. 

As a name for our country I can find none that 
pleases me better than Yumerica, which suggests 
our Union and our Continent, and easily adapts 
itself to all the purposes for which such a word is 
needed. 

Sec. 96. Our Present Constitution. — For the 
purpose of assisting the reader to compare the 
political system of our country with that of Great 
Britain, I here explain the main features of both. 
The government of the United States includes the 
federal and state authorities. 

The supreme authority is divided between the 
state and the federation; the former having the 
higher attributes of sovereignty, and the latter 
being mainly an agent for foreign and interstate 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 219 

affairs. The constitution of the State limits and 
that of the Union confers power; the State can do 
all those acts not forbidden, the Union only those 
for which permission is given. In this relation, 
the State appears as the principal and the Union 
as the agent. The State defines and protects all 
the most precious rights of person and property; 
it enacts and administers the civil and criminal 
laws; it alone can take private property for public 
purposes; and it opens its courts to the federal 
government when the latter wants to expropriate 
sites for fortifications or light houses. It confers 
the right of suffrage, and no vote for President or 
Congressman can be counted except under its di- 
rections. It creates all the minor political divi- 
sions, including counties, cities, townships and 
school districts. It organizes and directs the 
public school. Thus it controls nearly all the 
most important political and civil relations of life. 
The State has its legislature which consists of 
two chambers and meets once in two years for a 
session of three months. The senators are 
elected for two terms, half of them going out at 
the end of each session; the assemblymen are all 
chosen on the same day for a single term. The 
heads of the State executive departments, — gov- 
ernor, secretary, treasurer, school superintendent, 
and usually some others, — are elected by man- 
hood suffrage for four (in some states for two) 
years; and each appoints the clerks in his office 



220 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

for personal or partisan considerations. Each is 
independent of the others and independent also 
of the legislature. There is a state militia which 
has no discipline, and its officers are politicians 
who are more anxious to catch the votes of riot- 
ers than to maintain the dignity of the law. 

No State has exactly copied the constitution 
and statutes of another, and the country has 
forty-five different systems of law and legal pro- 
cedure, of rights and remedies. The deeds, wills, 
marriages, divorces and commercial contracts 
valid on one side of a small river may be void on 
the other bank, and the act criminal in one village 
may be permissible in another not a mile distant. 

Every State has its supreme appellate court, 
its district courts, with original jurisdiction in 
important civil and criminal cases, and its petty 
tribunals for misdemeanors and small civil suits. 
The judges are elected for short terms under 
partisan platforms, the principles of which often 
require specified interpretations of constitutions 
and laws. The forty-five states comprise nearly 
three thousand counties each of which has its leg- 
islative, executive and judicial officers, elected by 
the people for short terms, including a sheriff, 
clerk, recorder, treasurer, assessor, coroner, and 
public administrator, each of whom appoints his 
clerks and deputies. 

The counties are divided into more than 30,000 
townships, each of which has its officials and its 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 221 

political jurisdiction. In New England, the con- 
trol of the small township is held by the popular 
assembly or town meeting; in the south and west 
by an elected council. The large township or city 
is much more populous than the average county; 
and one-fourth of the population of the United 
States is in three hundred and fifty cities, of 
which twenty-eight had each in 1890 more than 
100,000 inhabitants. The systems of local gov- 
ernment differ greatly in the various states; and 
the rural townships are much more important 
politically in New England than in the southern 
and western states. Superior disciplinary con- 
trol is lacking everywhere. There is also a won- 
derful diversity in the city charters, many of 
which are wonders of complexity and absurdity. 
The federal constitution, the supreme law of 
an indissoluble Union, provides for a federal gov- 
ernment, with legislative, administrative and 
judicial branches, a treasury, an army and a navy. 
The head of the administration is a president who 
is elected indirectly by the people in every leap 
year. He appoints the federal judges, the mili- 
tary, naval and civil administrative officers, to 
hold during good behavior. The national legis- 
lature consists of two houses; the Kepresenta- 
tives apportioned according to population, 
elected for a two years term by manhood suffrage ; 
and the Senators elected by the state legislatures, 
two for each state for a six years term. Con- 



222 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

gress has control over currency, copyright, pat- 
ents for inventions, naturalization, and foreign 
and interstate commerce. 

The revenue of the federal government is ob- 
tained, nearly all of it, from import duties and ex- 
cise taxes. Congress may levy direct taxes on 
the states in proportion to their population; but as 
the ratio of wealth to inhabitants varies greatly 
such an assessment would be very unfair to some 
of the states, and besides the Union has no offi- 
cials and no iegal system for making collections 
from such sources. 

The federal judicial system comprises a Su- 
preme Court, which sits at Washington, and Cir- 
cuit and District Courts which hold sessions in 
other cities. The courts have authority to de- 
clare federal and state statutes void because not 
authorized by the Constitution. 

The main principles of English liberty guaran- 
teed in the Great Charter, the Habeas Corpus Act 
and the Bill of Eights are stated in the Constitu- 
tion of the United States. Every part of the 
country, except the District of Columbia and the 
sparsely populated territories, is represented in 
Congress with a voice in the enactment of laws, 
the levying of federal taxes and the appropria- 
tion of money. The business of the government 
is conducted in offices and recorded in books 
open to the people. The rights of jury trial, of 
confronting witnesses, of knowing the accusation 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 223 

and the name of the accuser in criminal cases, 
and of having counsel, and the liberties of wor- 
ship, speech, petition, press and public meeting 
are all held sacred. 

By its foreign jurisdiction, the Union controls 
treaties, embassies, consulships, foreign com- 
merce, shipping, war, peace, army, navy, fortifi- 
cations, light houses, coast survey and harbor 
work. Under its domestic powers, it manages 
indirect taxation, coinage, postal affairs, patents, 
copyrights, weights, measures, interstate com- 
merce and interstate litigation. Its two highest 
executive officers, the President and Vice Presi- 
dent, are elected by the people for quadrennial 
terms; the others are appointed by the President 
or his subordinates, most of them to hold for four 
years. The federal judges, appointed by the 
President to hold during good behavior, have 
power to nullify statutes and executive acts for 
unconstitutionality. This original American 
idea, is extremely important because of the num- 
erous blunders committed in the legislative and 
administrative departments, and it gives to our 
judiciary an influence and dignity not equalled 
elsewhere. 

Sec. 97. British Constitution. — The British 
Constitution is "unwritten"; that is, it consists of 
principles which have never been collected into 
an authoritative document, and many of them 
have never been officially defined. It confers om- 



224 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

nipotent political power on Parliament, the na 
tional legislature, composed of two Houses, that 
of the Peers and that of the Commons. The 
House of Peers includes two estates of the realm; 
the ecclesiastical Peers or bishops appointed by 
the Crown, and the secular Peers, who inherit 
their titles or are appointed by the Crown with 
the right of succession in their male heirs. The 
Crown cannot make a peerage to end with the 
death of the appointee. The Commons the third 
estate, by a suffrage limited to about one-half 
the adult males, elects representatives, who make 
up the lower House of Parliament and control the 
government. No law can be enacted without the 
consent of the Peers, but they must concur when 
the Commons insist. If they should be stubborn, 
the Crown must appoint new Peers to out-vote 
the obstructionists. Their House is useful to pre- 
vent inconsiderate action. 

Every act of Parliament is constitutional; no 
court has authority to declare it void because it 
does not harmonize with a previous enactment. 
Parliament has made the constitution and can 
change it by simple statute. The rights of repre- 
sentation, of free speech, free press, religious lib- 
erty, jury trial, habeas corpus, and all the other 
leading features of political and civil liberty in 
England have had no higher source. 

Royalty is not an estate of the realm, nor a po- 
litical office; its authority is merely ceremonial. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 225 

All its official acts must be done under the guid- 
ance of the ministry, and therefore it is not 
responsible and, according to the customary 
phrase, can do no wrong. The Crown is heredi- 
tary in the Hanoverian dynasty and may be worn 
by a woman but not by a Roman Catholic. 

The Administration is controlled by the Minis- 
try which is a Committee of the House of Com- 
mons, though none of its members may be in the 
House of Lords. This Ministry is responsible for 
every important legislative and executive act, 
and therefore it must control all taxes, appropria- 
tion, and measures of domestic or foreign policy. 
It must keep the intellectual leadership in Parlia- 
ment; and therefore must triumphantly defend 
its conduct before the bar of public opinion. It 
holds its mastery by discussion; it instructs the 
people on all the leading questions. Its parlia- 
mentary debates are the most instructive in the 
world. 

The political system of England had its main 
source in the mediaeval local institutions which 
have been maintained, developed and expanded, 
until no other country has better organizations for 
the control of local affairs. The parish, the town, 
the city and the county are practically independ- 
ent in the management of the public business that 
should belong to their respective jurisdictions. 
The centralization of all the higher functions of 
government in London does not interfere in the 



226 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

least with the liberty of the minor geographical 
divisions. 

The British Constitution has great merits. It 
has surpassed all others in the long period (eight 
centuries) of its almost continuous development, 
in the great number and high value of its origi- 
nal features, in the adoption of many of its prin- 
ciples by all other enlightened countries, and in 
its grand influence in raising Great Britain to the 
first place among all the nations of history. 

Sec. 98. Comparisons. — Of all national consti- 
tutions, the British is the best because it works 
most smoothly, gives most satisfaction to its in- 
telligent citizens and is administered by a people 
who have had the longest and the most instruc- 
tive experience in the methods of governing them- 
selves through national and local agencies. The 
points in which it is decidedly superior to the 
American constitution are that its central power 
is greater, it secures a more harmonious work- 
ing of all its parts, the members of its chief legis- 
lative body have a longer tenure of office (their 
full term in the House of Commons being seven 
years and many of them being reelected fre- 
quently), their Executive Committee or Ministry, 
assisted iby numerous able and experienced spe- 
cialists control the administration and the legis- 
lation; and the officials in the judicial and admin- 
istrative departments do honor to the nation. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 227 

The most serious defect of the British Consti- 
tution is that the House of Commons is subject to 
sudden revolutionary changes by the election of 
all its members at one time. This evil should be 
corrected by lengthening the full term to nine 
years, giving three members to each parliamen- 
tary district and electing one every third year, 
only the oldest member to go out in case of a dis- 
solution. 

The French people have neither the long famil- 
iarity with constitutional government nor the 
education otherwise needed to make a decided 
success of republican institutions with manhood 
suffrage. They would never be quiet under a 
despotism and therefore they will probably worry 
along under a disorderly republic until they adopt 
reforms which will give smoothness to their polit- 
ical movements. They have a great advantage 
over the people of the United States in the matter 
of national unity; their central government can 
protect its citizens. 

The constitutions of Great Britain and Italy 
work more smoothly than those of Germany and 
France, partly because they have a limited suf- 
frage. If they allowed their large class of very 
ignorant men to vote they would have much more 
disorder than they have. Though the British 
Parliamentary Reform of 1832 corrected many 
grave abuses directly and indirectly, it has been 
followed by a lowering of the character of the 



228 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

House of Commons, which is not so steadfast in 
its policy nor does it contain so large a propor- 
tion of very able men as before the change. Then 
the average parliamentary term was much longer 
than at present and the greater permanence not 
only attracted superior talents but gave an ex- 
perience that was of vast benefit to the public 
service. 

Sec. 99. Other Plans. — Various inefficient or in- 
sufficient plans to cure our political evils, — plans 
that may be called false remedies, — will foe men- 
tioned here. 

First, among these is the suggestion that all 
the offices should be given to good men. It is as 
wise as the scheme of the young rat to put a bell 
on the cat. Under our political system it is as 
impossible to keep unfit men out of a large pro- 
portion of the influential places as it was for the 
rat to put a bell on the cat. 

We have had a Civil Service Reform movement 
in the United States for the last thirty years, in 
which period its friends have held many meet- 
ings, published many papers, and obtained par- 
tial recognition in many political conventions, 
but they have gained little in the form of legisla- 
tive enactment, and that little is insecure. 

Their plan of action may be compared to that 
of a company made up to hunt a tiger which has 
done immense damage in an extensive region, 
under a written agreement that the beast should 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 229 

not be killed under any circumstances but should 
if possible be captured in a cage and then after 
one or two of its claws should be clipped, should 
be turned loose without other injury. 

Every state is now a stronghold of the Spoils 
System, and the best method, if not the only hope 
of purifying the government is to consolidate the 
nation and thus prepare the whole people for the 
overthrow of the pernicious influences which have 
been corrupting and debasing our public service. 

Sec. 100. Suffrage Restriction, — Many intelli- 
gent men believe, and some distinguished au- 
thors have said, that one of the greatest political 
evils of the XlXth century has been the exten- 
sion of the suffrage, and they find many facts in 
the history of the United States, Great Britain 
and France to support this opinion. H. S. 
Maine (Popular Government, 98) says "It seems to 
me quite certain that if for four centuries there 
had been a very widely extended franchise and a 
very large electoral body in this country, there 
would have been no reformation of religion, no 
change of dynasty, no toleration of dissent, not 
even an accurate calendar. The threshing ma- 
chine, the power loom, the spinning jenny and 
possibly the steam engine would have been pro- 
hibited. Even in our own day vaccination is in 
the utmost danger; and we may say generally 
that the gradual establishment of the masses in 
power is of the blackest omen for all legislation 



230 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

founded on scientific opinion which requires ten- 
sion of mind to understand it and self denial to 
submit to it." 

Most of the political evils that have risen or 
greatly expanded since the suffrage was granted 
to poor and ignorant men, have been the results 
not of that liberality, but of the gross laxity with 
which paupers, professional criminals, nonresi- 
dents, aliens and the recipients of bribes, have 
been permitted to vote, and of the spoils system, 
which has organized the citizens into large par- 
ties for the purpose of plundering the public 
treasury. 

Poverty should not exclude any American from 
a share in the government; the dignity, attached 
to the ballot, should be given to all the men who 
support themselves honestly, read English, have 
permanent homes, and have been adult citizens 
for five or ten years. A new constitution might 
wisely provide that after it had been in force for 
ten years, the suffrage should be limited to men 
who had reached the age of twenty-five, and ten 
years later to those of thirty years. By such 
changes the ballot would obtain a much higher 
value than it now has. Such a restriction of the 
suffrage however I do not consider indispensable 
to a good government. 

Frank J. Goodnow, Professor of Administra- 
tive Law in Columbia University, and the author 
of several good books on his specialty, regards 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 231 

universal suffrage as our greatest political evil 
and says (Municipal Problems, p. 150) "It must, 
however, be recognized that, as yet, the people 
are not generally convinced of the impropriety of 
universal suffrage. It will, unquestionably, take 
long years of agitation to bring such a conviction 
home to them and it will have to be shown that 
the present recognized evils of our governmental 
system are, without doubt, due to universal suf- 
frage before they will be brought to make any 
change." Many others agree on this point with 
Prof. Goodnow, but say nothing about it pub- 
licly, and thus indicate that they have little hope 
of reform. If they were right, the future of our 
country would be very dark. 

Sec. 101. Burnett's Plan.— In 1861, Peter H. 
Burnett published a pamphlet entitled The Ameri- 
can Theory of Government urging a radical reform 
of the national constitution, the consolidation of 
the nation, the conversion of the states into prov- 
inces, the prolongation of the presidential term 
to twenty years of the senatorial term to life, of 
the term in the House of Representatives to five 
years, and of terms in administrative offices gen- 
erally to good behavior, and the administrative 
officials to be appointed not elected. Though this 
plan is much superior to our present constitution, 
it has serious defects, of which the most promi- 
nent are the independent administration, the bi- 
cameral legislature, and the simultaneous elec- 



232 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

tion of all the members of the House of Represen- 
tatives. 

In his book entitled Republican Superstitions, 
Moncure D. Conway demands the consolidation 
of our government but does not explain, in detail, 
his ideas of the needful reform. 

Sec. 102. Stichieifs Plan. — Albert Stickney is 
the author of three books on American Polity en- 
titled A True Republic, The Political Problem and 
Democratic Government; and in this last one he de- 
mands the reorganization and consolidation of the 
nation on a novel and meritorious plan. He would 
give the legislative authority in the township to 
the assembly of the adult male citizens, who in 
their meetings, to be held in the day time once a 
year or oftener, should levy town taxes, order im- 
provements, make appropriations, and elect their 
mayor, every vote being taken by the voice on a 
roll call. The mayor should appoint the clerk, as- 
sessor, collector and other heads of departments; 
and each of these should have authority to ap- 
point and remove his subordinates, and should 
thus be responsible for the conduct of his office, 
as the mayor should be for them. The mayor 
should hold office until deposed by the township 
assembly. 

The county council should consist of a deputy 
from each township elected in the same manner 
as the mayor; and the county officials should be 
organized on the same general plan as those of 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 233 

the township, with a similar tenure and similar 
responsibility. The city council would be or- 
ganized on the same principles, except that the 
councilors would be elected by precincts, the as- 
semblies of which would have no authority to con- 
trol their local government that being left to the 
city authorities. The county and city councilors 
would hold office until removed by the assemblies 
of their respective precincts. 

The state or provincial legislature would con- 
sist of legislators elected from districts contain- 
ing several precincts each, the election to be by 
voice of the precinct assemblies. The legislature 
would elect the governor, who would appoint the 
secretary, treasurer, controller and so forth, to 
hold their places till deposed by the appointing 
power. Many precincts would be combined to 
choose a national Congressman, and also a presi- 
dential elector, and all these would hold till re- 
moved by the appointing power. The President 
would appoint all the heads of national adminis- 
trative departments (each to select his own sub- 
ordinates) and would also appoint the judges. 
There would be no popular election except in 
a township or precinct assembly and then by 
voice, only one office of a kind to be filled at a 
time; there would be no double legislative cham- 
ber; no presidential veto; no division of respon- 
sibility, no secure tenure of any office in defiance 
of popular will. 



234 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 103. Moffett's Plan.— The novelty and in- 
genuity of this political scheme are unquestion- 
able but in the fourteen years since it was sub- 
mitted to publication it has gained no advocates 
and though it might work better than our present 
plan, yet within the range of probabilities now 
perceptible, it has no chance of adoption. S. E. 
Moffett, another original thinker, in his book en- 
titled Suggestions in Government, accepts the main 
features of Mr. Stickney's plan, but proposes some 
changes. He would have the township assembly 
meet once a month in the evening, and elect by 
ballot instead of by voice the officials designated 
by Mr. Stickney. He would also give to the ad- 
ministrative head of the nation, state, city or 
county, or to one-fifth of the precincts, the au- 
thority to subject any legislative act to a referen- 
dum, or popular vote to be taken at the township 
or precinct meetings. He would also require a 
two-thirds vote of the electing body to depose any 
legislative or administrative official. He makes 
some good suggestions about the method of count- 
ing votes. 

Sec. 104. Hyslop's Plan. — In a book entitled 
Democracy, Prof. J. H. Hyslop has demanded a 
reform of our Government, and proposed certain 
measures which however are far from making a 
complete system, and thus he has left the reader 
in doubt as to his meaning. Not having obtained 
a clear view of the defects, he does not see dis- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 235 

tinctly how they should be remedied. Much, 
however, that he says deserves consideration. 

Sec. 105. Ford's Plan. — Henry J. Ford demands 
(American Politics, 365) some amendments to the 
federal constitution, for the purposes of convert- 
ing the presidency into a ceremonial office, di- 
minishing the power of the senate and admitting 
the members of the cabinet into the House of Bep- 
resentatives, but his reformatory ideas are pre- 
sented in vague terms as if they were not con- 
ceived clearly. His book has much information 
and implies the urgent need of a great reform. 

Sec. 106. Seaman's Plan.— In 1870 E. C. Seaman 
published a book advocating the adoption in our 
government of these principles: — 

1. Minority representation. 

2. Cumulative voting. 

3. Double elections, the first to make nomina- 
tions; the second to select officers from the can- 
didates thus chosen. 

4. Prohibition of nominations by caucuses or 
conventions. 

5. The appointment of judges and state admin- 
istrative officers or their election by the legisla- 
ture. 

6. The limitation of the presidency to one 
term. 

7. A property qualification (two hundred and 
fifty dollars) to vote for state senator, sheriff, as- 
sessor and constable. 



236 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Sec. 107. Despair. — The reformatory ideas of 
Burnett, Conway, Stickney, Moffett, Hyslop, Ford 
and Seaman have been treated with neglect not 
only by the literary critics, but also by the high 
officials, the lawyers and professors of polit- 
ical philosophy in our universities; and our in- 
telligent citizens generally have never even 
heard of their suggestions. This fact becomes 
more noteworthy when we recall to mind the 
fact that the opinions prevail extensively that our 
political condition is not only unsatisfactory but 
dangerous, and that therefore there is urgent 
need of higher wisdom in the guidance of na- 
tional affairs than we have had in the XlXth 
century. 

In private conversation, the opinion is often ex- 
pressed that no practical remedy for the corrup- 
tion of our government is within the reach of the 
present generation; that in our time the people 
will not be able to emancipate themselves from 
the dominion of the bosses. In his book on Muni- 
cipal Home Rule (8) F. J. Goodnow writes of "The 
despair of the people of ever obtaining good gov- 
ernment through their own efforts." In his Trial 
of the Constitution, (347) S. G. Fisher laments that 
"Everything has been bought and sold. . . . 
Every one deplores them . . . yet cannot think 
of a remedy." In his Rise and Growth of American 
Politics (215) H. J. Ford remarks that "Throes of 
change rack the state with pain in every limb 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 237 

and evoke continual groans. A cry for relief is 
the burden of public utterance." Lecky tells us 
truly in his Democracy and Liberty (I, 113) that "In 
no Teutonic nation of our day is the difference so 
marked between the public and private standards 
of morality as in the United States." In other 
words, he means to say that the office holders are 
much more inferior to the educated people gen- 
erally in character and capacity than in other en- 
lightened countries, and that we are submitting 
to a political system that is a disgrace to us, be- 
cause we have not known how to place our poli- 
tics on a level with our ethics. 

In his book on Municipal Reform (6) T. C. Dev- 
lin assures his readers that we, the Americans, 
at least admit our failures and our people are 
fast learning that there is no reason for the con- 
tinuance of blundering mismanagement of muni- 
cipal affairs and (that) the sooner it is replaced 
with permanent and systematic methods which 
will ensure good government, the brighter will be 
the outlook for the perpetuity of our national in- 
stitutions." 

Prof. Woodrow Wilson (318) complains that 
"the federal government lacks strength, because 
its powers are divided, — lacks promptness be- 
cause its authorities are multiplied, lacks wieldi- 
ness because its processes are roundabout, lacks 
efficiency because its responsibility is indistinct, 
and its action without competent direction." His 



238 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

neglect, to propose a plain remedy for these evils, 
seems to indicate that he is almost hopeless. 

The main reason, for the neglect with which 
the advocates of reform, in our national constitu- 
tion, have been treated, is, if I mistake not, that 
they did not distinctly explain the evils to be cor- 
rected, and thus failed to lay the foundation for 
their own argument and for the provocation of 
independent thought and subsequent research by 
their readers. Whether this effort of mine is to 
be more successful, time will show. 

Sec. 108. Conclusion, — The Americans gen- 
erally have little veneration for most of the 
opinions and products of past centuries, but there 
is one notable exception; they blindly venerate 
their federal constitution. Having read that 
that document saved their country from the great 
evil of secession in 1799, 1819, 1830, 1850 and 
1861, they imagine that it must be highly benefi- 
cent and almost faultless. 

Possessing little knowledge of the principles of 
government, except what they have learned from 
their office-holding and journalistic demagogues, 
they imagine that they possess the highest politi- 
cal wisdom and that the world will soon come to 
them for instruction. They do not know that 
Europe long since studied and rejected most of 
their political ideas, and regards them as mar- 
vels of folly, ignorance and danger. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 239 

When it was adopted, the federal constitution 
did not satisfy any party. It was the result of a 
compromise, in which each side surrendered 
much for the sake of maintaining the Union. 
The nationalists, including Hamilton, Washing- 
ton, Jay, Franklin and Gouverneur Morris, 
wanted a strong nationality; their opponents 
wanted a very weak federation. Neither party 
got what they wanted and yet now our politicians 
say their work is nearly perfect. 

The political system of the country has been 
greatly modified since 1787 though the federal 
constitution remains nearly as it was then. At 
first all the judges, mayors, and heads of the ad- 
ministrative offices in the counties and cities 
were appointed, not elected by the people, and 
they held during good behavior, as did the heads 
of federal administrative offices generally. Most 
of the members of the legislative bodies were 
elected again and again, so that there were ma- 
jorities of experienced members. The Committee 
System had not then taken shape, and the Spoils 
System had not then blossomed out into its na- 
tional conventions, platforms, bosses and other 
pernicious features. 

The changes generally have been for the worse, 
but some for the better. Slavery has been 
abolished; ecclesiastical animosity and privilege 
has diminished, and education has greatly ad- 
vanced. The people of the distant parts of the 



240 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

country have been brought together by railways, 
steamboats, telegraphs, and the intimacies of 
travel and traffic, until they have been cured of 
many of their local prejudices and animosities. 
They have learned to feel and to say that they 
are a nation. 

When they fully understand what nationality 
means and what blessings it could confer on 
them, they will consolidate their government. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 241 



CHAPTER VI. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Sec. 109. List of Books. — This list of books in- 
cludes all those from which quotations have been 
made in the preceding pages, — and others that de- 
serve the attention of the student of our govern- 
ment. 

Adams, Henry C, [Professor of Political Econ- 
omy in Michigan University] The Science of Fi- 
nance, New York, 1898. 

Adams, John, The Works of, 10 vols., Boston, 
1851. 

Amos, Sheldon, The Science of Politics, New 
York, 1883. 

Anonymous; W. W. Seaton, a biographical 
sketch, Boston, 1871. 

Bagehot, Walter, The English Constitution, 
Boston, 1873. 

Bannatyne, D. J., Handbook of Bepublican In- 
stitutions in the United States of America, New 
York, 1887. 

Bell, J. and Paton, J., Glasgow, its Municipal 
Organization and Administration, Glasgow, 1896. 
The best book of its kind known to me. 



242 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Bodley, John E. C., France, New York, 1898. 

Bolles, Albert S., The Financial History of the 
United States from 1861 to 1885, New York, 1886. 
The best book on its subject but far from exhaus- 
tive. 

Borgeaud, Charles. Adoption and Amend- 
ment of Constitutions, Translated, New York, 
1895. 

Bradford, Gamaliel, The Lesson of Popular 
Government, 2 vols., New York, 1899. An excel- 
lent book. 

Brough, Wm., The Natural Law of Money, New 
York, 1894. 

Brown, J. S., Partisan Politics, Philadelphia, 
1897. 

Bryce, James, The American Commonwealth, 
2 vols., London, 1883. This is a truthful picture 
of the political and social life of the United 
States, presented in a form of very high literary 
merit. 

Burnett, Peter H., Recollections and Opinions 
of an old Pioneer, New York, 1880. Also The 
American Theory of Government, New York, 
1863. 

Caldecott, A., English Colonization, New York, 
1891. The author quotes the language of Lord 
Dufferin in explanation of the reasons why the 
Canadians oppose annexation. 

Calhoun, John CL, A Discourse on the Constitu- 
tion and Government of the United States, 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 243 

Charleston, 1851. This is the sacred book of the 
secessionists and enemies of a strong federal 
union. 

Carnegie, Andrew, Triumphant Democracy, 
New York, 1888. 

Commons, J. R., [Professor of Sociology in 
Syracuse University] Proportional Representa- 
tion, New York, 1896. He attaches dispropor- 
tionate importance to proportionate representa- 
tion. 

Conant, Charles A., A History of Modern 
Banks of Issue, New York, 1896. 

Conkling, Alfred R., City Government in the 
United States, New York, 1894. 

Conway, Moncure D., Republican Supersti- 
tions, London, 1872. 

Cooley, Thomas M., Constitutional Limitations, 
Boston, 1878. Judge Cooley was professor of law 
in the University of Michigan and has a high 
reputation as a writer on American law, but 
does not seem to have studied the principles of 
comparative politics. 

Curtis, George William, Orations, 3 vols.. New 
York, 1894. 

Dallinger, F. W., Nominations for Elective 
Office in the United States, New York, 1897. 

Daniels, Winthrop M., [Professor of Political 
Economy in Princeton University] The Elements 
of Public Finance, New York, 1899. This is 
nearly all statement with very little discussion 



244 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

of the principles involved in the different national 
systems of finance. 

Devlin, T. C, Municipal Reform in the United 
States, New York, 1896. 

Dewees, F. P., The Mollie Maguires, Phil- 
adelphia, 1877. An account of the crimes com- 
mitted by the Mollie Maguires (members of the 
Ancient Order of Hibernians) as organizers and 
leaders in the great anthracite coal strike of 
Pennsylvania in 1877. 

Dicey, A. V., Introduction to the Law of the 
Constitution, London, 1893. 

Dix, Morgan. Memoirs of John A. Dix, 2 vols., 
New York, 1883. 

Dolman, F., Municipalities at Work, London, 
1895. 

Dunning, Wm. A., [Professor of History in 
Columbia University] Essays on the Civil War 
and Reconstruction, New York, 1898. 

Durand, Edward S., The Finances of New York 
City, New York, 1898. 

Eaton, Dorman B., Civil Service in Great Brit- 
ain, New York, 1880. 

Eliot, Charles W., [President of Harvard 
University] American Contributions to Civiliza- 
tion, New York, 1897. 

Everett, Edward, Orations and Speeches of, 4 
vols., Boston, 1868. 

Federalist, The. New York, 1873. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 245 

Fisher, Sydney G., The Evolution of the Con- 
stitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1897. 
Also Trial of the Constitution, Philadelphia, 1862. 

Fiske, John, American Political Ideas, New 
York, 1885. Also The Critical Period of Ameri- 
can History, 1783-1789, Boston, 1888. 

Ford, Henry J., The Rise and Growth of Ameri- 
can Politics, New York, 1898. 

Ford, Paul L., The Honorable Peter Stirling, 
New York, 1894. An American novel depicting 
the career of an able and upright lawyer who be- 
comes a successful manager of ward politics in 
the city of New York and is then elected governor 
of the state. The book shows much familiarity 
with the partisan system of the United States, 
but conveys grossly false ideas of the influences 
that predominate in the ward management of 
New York City. 

Francisco, M. J., Municipal Ownership vs. 
Private Corporations, Rutland, Vermont, 1898. 
As president of the National Electric Light Com- 
pany, the author studied the experience of many 
American cities and towns with their own electric 
light plants, and with detailed reports proves 
that the management has in a large proportion 
of cases, been incompetent, corrupt and ex- 
tremely expensive. 

Freeman, Edward A., A History of Federal 
Government in Greece and Italy, London, 1893. 
This is the best work on the subject but is prolix 



246 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

and incomplete. He has also written a book en- 
titled "Comparative Politics" but he has not mas- 
tered the subject and the work has little value. 

Garfield, James A., The works of, 2 vols., Bos- 
ton, 1883. In the combination of scholarship 
with oratory Garfield is the first of the American 
presidents, and much that he wrote can be 
studied now with interest and profit. 

Gladstone, W. E., Gleanings of Past Years, 7 
vols., New York, 1899. The article on "Kin be- 
yond the Sea" in the first volume is instructive 
and pleasant to Americans. 

Godkin, E. L., Unforeseen Tendencies of De- 
mocracy, New York, 1898. 

Goodnow, Frank J., [Professor of Administra- 
tive Law in Columbia University] Comparative 
Administrative Law, 2 vols., New York. 1893. 
Also Municipal Home Rule, New York, 1895. 
Also Municipal Problems, New York, 1899. 
These are good books. 

Greeley, Horace, Recollections of a Busy Life, 
New York, 1868. 

Haliburton, T., Rule and Misrule, New York, 
1851. 

Harrison, Benjamin, This Country of Ours, New 
York, 1897. This excellent book contains the 
best account ever written of many parts of our 
federal administration. 

Hart, Albert B., Introduction to the Study of 
Federal Government, Boston , 1891. This book 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 247 

gives a list of federal governments, describes 
many of their notable features, and contains 
much bibliographical information. 

Hoffman, Frank S., [Professor of Philosophy 
in Union College] The Sphere of the State, New 
York, 1893. 

Hoist, H. von, The Constitutional and Political 
History of the United States, Translated by J. J. 
Lalor, 7 vols., Chicago, 1889. One of the best 
political histories ever written. 

Hosmer, G. W., The People and Politics, Bos- 
ton, 1883. 

Hosmer, J. H., A Short History of Anglo Saxon 
Freedom, New York, 1890. 

Hyslop, James H., [Professor of Logic in Col- 
umbia University] Democracy, New York, 1899. 
This work shows ability but was published be- 
fore the author had systematized and clarified his 
ideas. 

Jennings, L. J., Eighty Years of Republican 
Government in the United States, New York, 
1868. 

Julian, George W., Political Recollections, 1840 
to 1872, Chicago 1884, One of the best auto- 
biographies of the American politicians. 

Kansas, Second Annual Report of Bureau of 
Labor of, Topeka, 1887. This book contains the 
best account that I have found of the Missouri 
Railway Strike of 1886. 



248 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Kent, James, Commentaries on American Law, 
4 vols., Boston, 1867. As an expositor of a system 
of national law, Kent has no superior. 

Kinley, David, The Independent Treasury of 
the United States, New York, 1893. 

Lamon, Ward H., The Life of Abraham Lincoln, 
Boston, 1872. 

Le Bon, Gustave, The Psychology of Socialism, 
New York, 1899. Also The Psychology of Peo- 
ples, New York, 1898. 

Lecky, W. E. H., Democracy and Liberty, 2 
vols., New York, 1896. 

Lowell, Abbot L., Government and Parties in 
Continental Europe, 2 vols., Boston, 1896. 

Maine, Henry S., Popular Government, London, 
1886. 

Marshall, John, Writings upon the Federal Con- 
stitution, Washington, 1890. 

McClure, A. K., Our Presidents and how we 
make them, New York, 1900. 

McConachie, L. G., Congressional Committees, 
New York, 1898. 

McCracken, W. D., The Rise of the Swiss Re- 
public, Boston, 1892. The author is an American 
who resided long in Switzerland and has in the 
book compared its polity with that of his native 
land, and has admitted that the Swiss have the 
wiser and purer government. 

McCulloch, Hugh, Men and Measures of Half a 
Century, New York, 1889. An excellent autobi- 
ography. 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 249 

McKnight, D. A., The Electoral System of the 
United States of America, Philadelphia, 1878. 

Mill, John S., Representative Government, New 
York, 1874. The best book on modern constitu- 
tional government; some of the important fea- 
tures of which have never been so forcibly ex- 
plained and advocated by any other author. Also 
Dissertations and Discussions, 3 vols., London, 
1869. 

Moffett, S. E., Suggestions on Government, Chi- 
cago, 1899. 

Morse, John T., Jr., The Life of Alexander 
Hamilton. 2 vols., Boston, 1876. 

Moses, Bernard, The Federal Government of 
Switzerland, Oakland, 1889. 

Munro, J. E. 0., The Constitution of Canada, 
Cambridge, 1889. 

Otken, Charles H., The Ills of the South, New 
York, 1894. 

Parton, James, Life of Thomas Jefferson, Bos- 
ton, 1889. 

Pike, J. S., The Prostrate State, New York, 
1874. This work contains an account of the car- 
pet-bag frauds in South Carolina between 1869 
and 1873. 

Pinkerton, Allan, Strikers, Communists, 
Tramps and Detectives, New York, 1878. This 
book is in many respects very unsatisfactory but 
contains the best account yet published of the 
great railway riot in 1877 at Baltimore, Pittsburg, 



250 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Harrisburg, Buffalo, Chicago and many other 
cities. 

Roosevelt, Theodore, Essays on Practical Poli- 
tics, New York, 1888. 

San Francisco, Charter of the City of, Adopted 
by a Board of Freeholders in 1898, San Fran- 
cisco, 1898. 

Savidge, E. C, Life of B. H. Brewster, Philadel- 
phia, 1891. This work contains a long account of 
the trials for great frauds committed in the 
postal department of the United "States — the 
Star Route Cases, in which many officials were 
engaged. 

Schuyler, Eugene, American Diplomacy, New 
York, 1886. Besides explaining the American 
consular and diplomatic systems, this book has 
some suggestive remarks about congressional 
legislation. 

Scott, Eben G., Reconstruction during the Civil 
War in the United States of America, Boston, 
1895. 

Scott, W. A., Repudiation of State Debts, New 
York, 1893. 

Scouler, James, [Professor of Law in Johns 
Hopkins University] Constitutional Studies, New 
York, 1897. 

Seaman, E. C, The American System of Gov- 
ernment, New York, 1870. 

Shaw, Albert, Municipal Government of Great 
Britain, New York, 1895. Also Municipal Gov- 



REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 251 

ernment in Continental Europe, New York, 1895. 
Excellent books. 

Stanwood, Edward, A History of the Presiden- 
cy, New York, 1898. 

Stickney, Albert, The Political Problem, New 
York, 1890. Also Democratic Government, New 
York, 1885. Also a True Republic, New York, 
1879. 

Story, Joseph, Commentaries on the Constitu- 
tion, 4 vols., Boston, 1840. 

Story, Joseph, Life and Letters of, Edited by 
W. W. Story, London, 1887. 

Sterne, S., Constitutional History and Political 
Development of the United States, New York, 
1888. The book is not without merit but is not 
large enough for its title. 

Talleyrand-Perigord, Marquis de, Etude des 
Etats-Unis d'Amerique, New York, 1876. 

Thompson, Daniel G., Politics in a Democracy, 
New York, 1893. 

Tiedeman, C. G., [Professor of Law in Missouri 
University] The Unwritten Constitution of the 
United States, New York, 1890. 

Tuckerman, Henry T., America, New York, 
1864. 

Upton, J. K., Money in Politics, Boston, 1884. 

Washington, Booker T., The Future of the 
American Negro, Boston, 1900. 

Wilcox, Delos F., The Study of City Govern- 
ment, New York, 1897. 



252 REFORM OR REVOLUTION? 

Wilson, Woodrow, [Professor of Jurisprudence 
in Princeton University] Congressional Govern- 
ment, Boston, 1885. The best exposure of the de- 
fects of the control of legislation by committees. 

Wright, John A., How to get good judges, San 
Francisco, 1892. 

THE END. 



